Support in Abstract Argumentation (bibtex)
by Guido Boella, Dov M. Gabbay, Leendert van der Torre, Serena Villata
Abstract:
In this paper, we consider two drawbacks of Cayrol and Lagasque-Schiex's meta-argumentation theory to model bipolar argumentation frameworks. We consider first the ``lost of admissibility'' in Dung's sense and second, the definition of notions of attack in the context of a support relation. We show how to prevent these drawbacks by introducing support meta-arguments. Like the model of Cayrol and Lagasque-Schiex, our formalization confirms the use of meta-argumentation to reuse Dung's properties. We do not take a stance towards the usefulness of a support relation among arguments, though we show that if one would like to introduce them, it can be done without extending Dung's theory. Finally, we show how to use meta-argumentation to instantiate an argumentation framework to represent defeasible support. In this model of support, the support relation itself can be attacked.
Reference:
Support in Abstract Argumentation (Guido Boella, Dov M. Gabbay, Leendert van der Torre, Serena Villata), In Proceedings of the Third International Conference on Computational Models of Argument (COMMA'10), Frontiers in Artificial Intelligence and Applications, IOS Press, 2010.
Bibtex Entry:
@InProceedings{Boella2010e,
  Title                    = {Support in Abstract Argumentation},
  Author                   = {Guido Boella and Dov M. Gabbay and Leendert van der Torre and Serena Villata},
  Booktitle                = {Proceedings of the Third International Conference on Computational Models of Argument (COMMA'10)},
  Year                     = {2010},
  Pages                    = {40-51},
  Publisher                = {Frontiers in Artificial Intelligence and Applications, IOS Press},

  Abstract                 = {In this paper, we consider two drawbacks of Cayrol and Lagasque-Schiex's meta-argumentation theory to model bipolar argumentation frameworks. We consider first the ``lost of admissibility'' in Dung's sense and second, the definition of notions of attack in the context of a support relation. We show how to prevent these drawbacks by introducing support meta-arguments. Like the model of Cayrol and Lagasque-Schiex, our formalization confirms the use of meta-argumentation to reuse Dung's properties. We do not take a stance towards the usefulness of a support relation among arguments, though we show that if one would like to introduce them, it can be done without extending Dung's theory. Finally, we show how to use meta-argumentation to instantiate an argumentation framework to represent defeasible support. In this model of support, the support relation itself can be attacked.},
  Affiliation              = {icr},
  Bdsk-url-1               = {http://www.booksonline.iospress.nl/Content/View.aspx?piid=18252},
  Timestamp                = {2013.07.26},
  Url                      = {http://www.booksonline.iospress.nl/Content/View.aspx?piid=18252}
}
Powered by bibtexbrowser