Connecting Databases with Argumentation
In this paper we introduce a proposal to give argumentation capacity to databases. A database is said to have argumentation capacity if it has the capacity to extract from the database a set of interacting arguments for and against claims and to determine the overall status of some information given all the interactions among all the arguments. We represent conflicts among arguments using a construct called contestation, which permits us to represent verious degrees of conflict among arguments. Argumentation databases as proposed here give answers to queries which are annotated with confidence values reflecting the degree of confidence one should have in the answer, where the degree of confidence is determined by the overall effect of all the conflicts and interactions among arguments.
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
- [ABW88]K.R. Apt, H.A. Blair, and A. Walker. Towards a Theory of Declarative Knowledge. In J. Minker, editor, Foundations of Deductive Databases and Logic Programming, pages 89–148. Morgan Kaufmann Pub., Washington, D.C., 1988.Google Scholar
- [AJ94]S. Abramsky and A. Jung. Domain theory. In S. Abramsky, D. M. Gabbay, and T. S. E. Maibaum, editors, Handbook of Logic in Computer Science, volume 3, pages 1–168. Oxford Univ. Press, 1994.Google Scholar
- [BBE98]A. Bouguettaya, B. Benatallah, and A. Elmagarmid. Interconnecting Heterogeneous Information Systems. Kluwer Academic Publishers, 1998.Google Scholar
- [GL94]T. Gaasterland and J. Lobo. Qualified answers that reflect user needs and preferences. In Proceedings of the 20th VLDB Conference, 1994.Google Scholar
- [Llo87]J. Lloyd. Foundations of Logic Programming. Springer-Verlag, second edition edition, 1987.Google Scholar
- [Pra96a]Shekhar Pradhan. Semantics of Normal Logic Programs and Contested Information. In Proc. 11th IEEE Symposium on Logic in Computer Science, 1996.Google Scholar
- [Pra96b]Shekhar Pradhan. Logic Programs with Contested Information. In M. Maher ed. Proc. Joint International Conference and Symposium on Logic Programming, MIT Press, 1996.Google Scholar
- [Pra01]Shekhar Pradhan. Reasoning with conflicting information in artificial intelligence and database theory. Technical Report CS-TR-4211, Dept of Computer Science, University of Maryland, College Park, Md 20742, 2001. Ph.D. dissertation.Google Scholar
- [PS96a]Henry Praaken and Giovanni Sartor. A system for defeasible argumentation with defeasible priorities. In Proc. of the International Conference on Formal Aspects of Practical Reasoning. Springer Verlag Lecture Notes in Artificial Intelligence No. 1085, 1996.Google Scholar