Relations between assumption-based approaches in nonmonotonic logic and formal argumentation

by   Jesse Heyninck, et al.

In this paper we make a contribution to the unification of formal models of defeasible reasoning. We present several translations between formal argumentation frameworks and nonmonotonic logics for reasoning with plausible assumptions. More specifically, we translate adaptive logics into assumption-based argumentation and ASPIC+, ASPIC+ into assumption-based argumentation and a fragment of assumption-based argumentation into adaptive logics. Adaptive logics are closely related to Makinson's default assumptions and to a significant class of systems within the tradition of preferential semantics in the vein of KLM and Shoham. Thus, our results also provide close links between formal argumentation and the latter approaches.



page 1

page 2

page 3

page 4


Equipping sequent-based argumentation with defeasible assumptions

In many expert and everyday reasoning contexts it is very useful to reas...

Prioritized Norms in Formal Argumentation

To resolve conflicts among norms,various nonmonotonic formalisms can be ...

Theme Aspect Argumentation Model for Handling Fallacies

In this paper, we present a novel approach to identify fallacies through...

Assumption-Based Approaches to Reasoning with Priorities

This paper maps out the relation between different approaches for handli...

On Natural Language Generation of Formal Argumentation

In this paper we provide a first analysis of the research questions that...

Design and Results of the Second International Competition on Computational Models of Argumentation

Argumentation is a major topic in the study of Artificial Intelligence. ...

Identifying the Class of Maxi-Consistent Operators in Argumentation

Dung's abstract argumentation theory can be seen as a general framework ...
This week in AI

Get the week's most popular data science and artificial intelligence research sent straight to your inbox every Saturday.