Review: on the evolving relation between belief revision and argumentation

Authors:
Marcelo a. Falappa;Alejandro j. Garc??a;Gabriele Kern-isberner;Guillermo r. Simari
Affiliations:
Artificial intelligence research and development laboratory, department of computer science and engineering, universidad nacional del sur, consejo nacional de investigaciones cient??ficas y t??cni ...;Artificial intelligence research and development laboratory, department of computer science and engineering, universidad nacional del sur, consejo nacional de investigaciones cient??ficas y t??cni ...;Department of computer science, university of dortmund, otto-hahn-str. 16, 44227dortmund, germany/ e-mail: gabriele.kern-isberner@cs.uni-dortmund.de;Artificial intelligence research and development laboratory, department of computer science and engineering, universidad nacional del sur, consejo nacional de investigaciones cient??ficas y t??cni ...
Venue:
The Knowledge Engineering Review
Year:
2011

Citing 13
Cited 2

An assumption-based TMS

Artificial Intelligence
Kernel contraction

Journal of Symbolic Logic
On the acceptability of arguments and its fundamental role in nonmonotonic reasoning, logic programming and n-person games

Artificial Intelligence
Belief Revision

Belief Revision
Explanations, belief revision and defeasible reasoning

Artificial Intelligence
Defeasible logic programming: an argumentative approach

Theory and Practice of Logic Programming
Revisions of knowledge systems using epistemic entrenchment

TARK '88 Proceedings of the 2nd conference on Theoretical aspects of reasoning about knowledge
Argument Theory Change: Revision Upon Warrant

Proceedings of the 2008 conference on Computational Models of Argument: Proceedings of COMMA 2008
Argument theory change applied to defeasible logic programming

AAAI'08 Proceedings of the 23rd national conference on Artificial intelligence - Volume 1
Determining explanations using transmutations

IJCAI'95 Proceedings of the 14th international joint conference on Artificial intelligence - Volume 1
How to infer from inconsistent beliefs without revising

IJCAI'95 Proceedings of the 14th international joint conference on Artificial intelligence - Volume 2
Abduction as belief revision: a model of preferred explanations

AAAI'93 Proceedings of the eleventh national conference on Artificial intelligence
Change in abstract argumentation frameworks: adding an argument

Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research

Review: a quarter-century of the knowledge engineering review: Introduction to the special issue

The Knowledge Engineering Review
An argumentation-based approach to cooperative multi-source epistemic conflict resolution

MATES'12 Proceedings of the 10th German conference on Multiagent System Technologies

Quantified Score

Hi-index	0.00

Visualization

Abstract

Research on the relation between Belief Revision and Argumentation has always been fruitful in both directions: some argumentation formalisms can be used to define belief change operators, and belief change techniques have also been used for modeling the dynamics of beliefs in argumentation formalisms. In this paper, we give a historical perspective on how belief revision has evolved in the last three decades, and how it has been combined with argumentation. First, we will recall the foundational works concerning the links between both areas. On the basis of such insights, we will present a conceptual view on this topic and some further developments. We offer a glimpse into the future of research in this area based on the understanding of argumentation and belief revision as complementary, mutually useful disciplines.