A Common Framework for Board Games and Argumentation Games

Authors:
Jenny Eriksson Lundström;Jørgen Fischer Nilsson;Andreas Hamfelt
Affiliations:
Department of Information Science, Computer and Systems Science Division, Uppsala University, Sweden;DTU Informatics, The Technical University of Denmark, Denmark;Department of Information Science, Computer and Systems Science Division, Uppsala University, Sweden
Venue:
Proceedings of the 2009 conference on Information Modelling and Knowledge Bases XX
Year:
2009

Citing 12
Cited 2

Defeasible logic

Handbook of logic in artificial intelligence and logic programming (vol. 3)
The Pleadings Game: an exercise in computational dialectics

Artificial Intelligence and Law
On the acceptability of arguments and its fundamental role in nonmonotonic reasoning, logic programming and n-person games

Artificial Intelligence
Towards a logic programming methodology based on higher-order predicates

New Generation Computing
Artificial intelligence: a new synthesis

Artificial intelligence: a new synthesis
Logical models of argument

ACM Computing Surveys (CSUR)
Argumentation Semantics for Defeasible Logic

Journal of Logic and Computation
Dialectic proof procedures for assumption-based, admissible argumentation

Artificial Intelligence
A metalogic formalization of legal argumentation as game trees with defeasible reasoning

ICAIL '05 Proceedings of the 10th international conference on Artificial intelligence and law
Formalising arguments about the burden of persuasion

Proceedings of the 11th international conference on Artificial intelligence and law
A rule-sceptic characterization of acceptable legal arguments

Proceedings of the 11th international conference on Artificial intelligence and law
Legal rules and argumentation in a metalogic framework

Proceedings of the 2007 conference on Legal Knowledge and Information Systems: JURIX 2007: The Twentieth Annual Conference

Towards a dynamic metalogic implementation of legal argumentation

Proceedings of the 13th International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Law
A dynamic metalogic argumentation framework implementation

RuleML'2011 Proceedings of the 5th international conference on Rule-based reasoning, programming, and applications

Quantified Score

Hi-index	0.00

Visualization

Abstract

In this paper we discuss models of formal argumentation games. We argue that the tactics and strategies of board-games like chess provide a useful analogy for adversarial argumentation games. The objective of this study is to elaborate on a common model for board games and argumentation dialogues. In particular we strive at making analogies between tactical and strategic chess game notions and notions in adversarial argumentation games.