A Brief Overview of Research in Argumentation Systems
Conference paper
Abstract
The area of argumentation in Artificial Intelligence has been steadily growing for the last three decades. Many subareas have been delineated within it as the research expanded, giving birth to a field that is exciting, fruitful and rewarding. The challenges are many, and they are met with methods and techniques that have enriched the field of Knowledge Representation and Reasoning. In this paper, a short structured overview of research in the area of Argumentation Systems will be provided in order to lay a foundation for further discussion. This overview will also bring about a personal perspective of the future directions of research and development of the area.
Keywords
Multiagent System Belief Base Argumentation Framework Argumentation System Attack Relation
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.
Preview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
References
- 1.Amgoud, L., Cayrol, C., Lagasquie-Schiex, M.C.: On the bipolarity in argumentation frameworks. In: Delgrande, J.P., Schaub, T. (eds.) NMR, pp. 1–9 (2004)Google Scholar
- 2.Baroni, P., Giacomin, M.: Semantics of abstract argument systems. In: Rahwan, I., Simari, G.R. (eds.) Argumentation in Artificial Intelligence, pp. 24–44. Springer, Heidelberg (2009)Google Scholar
- 3.Bench-Capon, T.J.M.: Value-based argumentation frameworks. In: Benferhat, S., Giunchiglia, E. (eds.) NMR, pp. 443–454 (2002)Google Scholar
- 4.Bench-Capon, T.J.M., Dunne, P.E.: Special Issue on Argumentation in Artificial Intelligence. Artificial Intelligence 171(10-15) (July-October 2005)Google Scholar
- 5.Bench-Capon, T.J.M., Dunne, P.E.: Argumentation in artificial intelligence. Artificial Intelligence 171(10-15), 619–641 (2007)MathSciNetCrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar
- 6.Besnard, P., Hunter, A.: A Logic-Based Theory of Deductive Arguments. Artif. Intell. 128(1-2), 203–235 (2001)MathSciNetCrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar
- 7.Besnard, P., Hunter, A.: Elements of Argumentation. MIT Press, Cambridge (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 8.Besnard, P., Hunter, A.: Argumentation based on classical logic. In: Rahwan, I., Simari, G.R. (eds.) Argumentation in Artificial Intelligence, pp. 133–152. Springer, Heidelberg (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 9.Caminada, M.: A Gentle Introduction to Argumentation Semantics (2008), http://users.numericable.lu/martincaminada/publications/Semantics_Introduction.pdf
- 10.Chesñevar, C.I., Maguitman, A.G., Loui, R.P.: Logical models of argument. ACM Computing Surveys 32(4), 337–383 (2000)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 11.Coste-Marquis, S., Devred, C., Marquis, P.: Constrained argumentation frameworks. In: Doherty, P., Mylopoulos, J., Welty, C.A. (eds.) KR, pp. 112–122. AAAI Press, Menlo Park (2006)Google Scholar
- 12.Dix, J., Parsons, S., Prakken, H., Simari, G.R.: Research Challenges for Argumentation. Computer Science - R&D 23(1), 27–34 (2009)Google Scholar
- 13.Dung, P.M.: On the acceptability of arguments and its fundamental role in nonmonotonic reasoning, logic programming and n-person games. Artificial Intelligence 77(2), 321–358 (1995)MathSciNetCrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar
- 14.García, A.J., Simari, G.R.: Defeasible logic programming: An argumentative approach. Theory and Practice of Logic Programming 4(1-2), 95–138 (2004)MathSciNetCrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar
- 15.Griswold, C.: Plato on rhetoric and poetry. In: Zalta, E.N. (ed.) The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (Fall 2009 edn.) (2009)Google Scholar
- 16.Modgil, S., Caminada, M.: Proof theories and algorithms for abstract argumentation frameworks. In: Rahwan, I., Simari, G.R. (eds.) Argumentation in Artificial Intelligence, pp. 105–132. Springer, Heidelberg (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 17.Modgil, S.: Reasoning about preferences in argumentation frameworks. Artif. Intell. 173, 901–934 (2009)MathSciNetCrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar
- 18.Pollock, J.L.: Defeasible reasoning. Cognitive Science 11(4), 481–518 (1987)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 19.Prakken, H.: An abstract framework for argumentation with structured arguments. Argument and Computation 1, 93–124 (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 20.Prakken, H., Vreeswijk, G.: Logics for defeasible argumentation. In: Gabbay, D., Guenthner, F. (eds.) Handbook of Philosophical Logic, vol. 4, pp. 218–319. Kluwer Academic Pub., Dordrecht (2002)Google Scholar
- 21.Rahwan, I.: Special Issue on Argumentation in Multi-Agent Systems. Journal of Autonomous Agents and Multi-Agent Systems 11(2) (September 2005)Google Scholar
- 22.Rahwan, I., McBurney, P.: Guest editors’ Argumentation Technology. IEEE Intelligent Systems 22(6), 21–23 (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 23.Rahwan, I., Simari, G.R.: Argumentation in Artificial Intelligence. Springer, Heidelberg (2009)Google Scholar
- 24.Rapp, C.: Aristotle’s rhetoric. In: Zalta, E.N. (ed.) The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (Spring 2010 edn.) (2010)Google Scholar
- 25.Reed, C., Grasso, F.: Recent Advances in Computational Models of Natural Argument. Int. J. Intell. Syst. 22(1), 1–15 (2007)CrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar
- 26.Simari, G.R., Loui, R.P.: A mathematical treatment of defeasible reasoning and its implementation. Artificial Intelligence 53(2-3), 125–157 (1992)MathSciNetCrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar
- 27.Stolzenburg, F., García, A., Chesñevar, C.I., Simari, G.R.: Computing Generalized Specificity. Journal of Non-Classical Logics 13(1), 87–113 (2003)CrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar
Copyright information
© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2011