A mathematical treatment of defeasible reasoning and its implementation
Artificial Intelligence
Artificial Intelligence
Argumentative logics: reasoning with classically inconsistent information
Data & Knowledge Engineering
Graph theoretical structures in logic programs and default theories
Theoretical Computer Science
Abstract argumentation systems
Artificial Intelligence
An abstract, argumentation-theoretic approach to default reasoning
Artificial Intelligence
Extending abstract argumentation systems theory
Artificial Intelligence
A logic-based theory of deductive arguments
Artificial Intelligence
A Reasoning Model Based on the Production of Acceptable Arguments
Annals of Mathematics and Artificial Intelligence
On the computational complexity of assumption-based argumentation for default reasoning
Artificial Intelligence
Coherence in finite argument systems
Artificial Intelligence
Inferring from Inconsistency in Preference-Based Argumentation Frameworks
Journal of Automated Reasoning
Credulous and Sceptical Argument Games for Preferred Semantics
JELIA '00 Proceedings of the European Workshop on Logics in Artificial Intelligence
Acceptability of arguments as `logical uncertainty'
ECSQARU '93 Proceedings of the European Conference on Symbolic and Quantitative Approaches to Reasoning and Uncertainty
From Non-Monotonic Syntax-Based Entailment to Preference-Based Argumentation
ECSQARU '95 Proceedings of the European Conference on Symbolic and Quantitative Approaches to Reasoning and Uncertainty
Symmetric argumentation frameworks
ECSQARU'05 Proceedings of the 8th European conference on Symbolic and Quantitative Approaches to Reasoning with Uncertainty
On the acceptability of arguments in bipolar argumentation frameworks
ECSQARU'05 Proceedings of the 8th European conference on Symbolic and Quantitative Approaches to Reasoning with Uncertainty
Dialectical Proof Theories for the Credulous Prudent Preferred Semantics of Argumentation
ECSQARU '07 Proceedings of the 9th European Conference on Symbolic and Quantitative Approaches to Reasoning with Uncertainty
Handling controversial arguments in bipolar argumentation systems
Proceedings of the 2006 conference on Computational Models of Argument: Proceedings of COMMA 2006
| Hi-index | 0.00 |
We present new careful semantics within Dung’s theory of argumentation. Under such careful semantics, two arguments cannot belong to the same extension whenever one of them indirectly attacks a third argument while the other one indirectly defends the third. We argue that our semantics lead to a better handling of controversial arguments than Dung’s ones in some settings. We compare the careful inference relations induced by our semantics w.r.t. cautiousness; we also compare them with the inference relations induced by Dung’s semantics.