Skip to main content

A Three-Layer Argumentation Framework

  • Conference paper

Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNAI,volume 7132)

Abstract

Argumentation frameworks which are abstract are suitable for the study of independent properties of any specific aspect (e.g. arguments sceptical and credulous admissible) that are relevant for any argumentation context. However, its direct adoption on specific application contexts requires dealing with questions such as the argument structure, the argument categories, the conditions under which an attack/support is established between arguments, etc. This paper presents a generic argumentation framework which comprehends a conceptualization layer to capture the expressivity and semantics of the argumentation data employed in a specific context and simplifies its adoption by applications. The conceptualization layer together with the defined argument structure is exploited to automatically derive the attack and support relationships between arguments.

Keywords

  • Argumentation Frameworks
  • Argument Instantiation
  • Argument Schemes
  • Bipolar Argumentation
  • Agents
  • MAS

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution.

Buying options

Chapter
USD   29.95
Price excludes VAT (Canada)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD   54.99
Price excludes VAT (Canada)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD   69.99
Price excludes VAT (Canada)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Learn about institutional subscriptions

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Wooldridge, M.: Reasoning about rational agents. The MIT press, Cambridge (2000)

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  2. Moran, R.: Authority and Estrangement: An Essay on Self-Knowledge. Princeton University Press (2001)

    Google Scholar 

  3. Walton, D.N., Krabbe, E.C.W.: Commitment in dialogue. Suny Press (1995)

    Google Scholar 

  4. Dung, P.M.: On the acceptability of arguments and its fundamental role in nonmonotonic reasoning, logic programming and n-person games. Artificial Intelligence 77, 321–357 (1995)

    CrossRef  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  5. Cayrol, C., Lagasquie-Schiex, M.C.: On the Acceptability of Arguments in Bipolar Argumentation Frameworks. In: Godo, L. (ed.) ECSQARU 2005. LNCS (LNAI), vol. 3571, pp. 378–389. Springer, Heidelberg (2005)

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  6. Bench-Capon, T.J.M.: Persuasion in Practical Argument Using Value-based Argumentation Frameworks. J. Logic Computation 13, 429–448 (2003)

    CrossRef  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  7. Baroni, P., Giacomin, M.: Semantics of Abstract Argument Systems. In: Argumentation in Artificial Intelligence, pp. 25–44 (2009)

    Google Scholar 

  8. Prakken, H.: An abstract framework for argumentation with structured arguments. Argument & Computation 1, 93 (2010)

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  9. Caminada, M., Amgoud, L.: On the evaluation of argumentation formalisms. Artificial Intelligence 171, 286–310 (2007)

    CrossRef  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  10. Cayrol, C., Lagasquie-Schiex, M.C.: Gradual Valuation for Bipolar Argumentation Frameworks. In: Godo, L. (ed.) ECSQARU 2005. LNCS (LNAI), vol. 3571, pp. 366–377. Springer, Heidelberg (2005)

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  11. Gruber, T.R.: A translation approach to portable ontology specifications. Journal of Knowledge Acquisition 5, 199–220 (1993)

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  12. Gruber, T.: What is an Ontology?, http://www-ksl.stanford.edu/kst/what-is-an-ontology.html

  13. Walton, D.N.: Fundamentals of critical argumentation. Cambridge Univ. Pr. (2006)

    Google Scholar 

  14. Bratman, M.: Intention, Plans and Practical Reason. Harvard University Press, Cambridge (1987)

    Google Scholar 

  15. Wooldridge, M.: An Introduction to MultiAgent Systems. Wiley (2009)

    Google Scholar 

  16. Chesñevar, C., McGinnis, J., Modgil, S., Rahwan, I., Reed, C., Simari, G., South, M., Vreeswijk, G., Willmott, S.: Towards an Argument Interchange Format. The Knowledge Engineering Review 21, 293–316 (2006)

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  17. Rahwan, I., Banihashemi, B.: Arguments in OWL: A Progress Report. In: Proceeding of the 2008 Conference on Computational Models of Argument: Proceedings of COMMA 2008, pp. 297–310. IOS Press, Amsterdam (2008)

    Google Scholar 

  18. Rahwan, I., Banihashemi, B., Reed, C., Walton, D., Abdallah, S.: Representing and classifying arguments on the semantic web. The Knowledge Engineering Review (2011)

    Google Scholar 

  19. Maio, P., Silva, N.: TLAF Meta-Model Layer as an Ontology, http://www.dei.isep.ipp.pt/~pmaio/TLAF/Ontology/TLAF_Ontology.owl

  20. Gordon, T.F., Prakken, H., Walton, D.: The Carneades model of argument and burden of proof. Artif. Intell. 171, 875–896 (2007)

    CrossRef  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  21. Verheij, B.: DefLog: on the Logical Interpretation of Prima Facie Justified Assumptions. Journal of Logic and Computation 13, 319–346 (2003)

    CrossRef  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  22. Amgoud, L., Cayrol, C., Lagasquie-Schiex, M.C., Livet, P.: On bipolarity in argumentation frameworks. Int. J. Intell. Syst. 23, 1062–1093 (2008)

    CrossRef  MATH  Google Scholar 

  23. Karacapilidis, N., Papadias, D.: Computer Supported Argumentation And Collaborative Decision Making: The Hermes System. Information Systems 26, 259–277 (2001)

    CrossRef  MATH  Google Scholar 

  24. Verheij, B.: On the existence and multiplicity of extensions in dialectical argumentation, cs/0207067 (2002)

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

Copyright information

© 2012 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg

About this paper

Cite this paper

Maio, P., Silva, N. (2012). A Three-Layer Argumentation Framework. In: Modgil, S., Oren, N., Toni, F. (eds) Theorie and Applications of Formal Argumentation. TAFA 2011. Lecture Notes in Computer Science(), vol 7132. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-29184-5_11

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-29184-5_11

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-642-29183-8

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-642-29184-5

  • eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)