A logical framework for modelling legal argument
ICAIL '93 Proceedings of the 4th international conference on Artificial intelligence and law
ATAL '99 6th International Workshop on Intelligent Agents VI, Agent Theories, Architectures, and Languages (ATAL),
On bipolarity in argumentation frameworks
International Journal of Intelligent Systems - Bipolar Representations of Information and Preference Part 2: Reasoning and Learning
An Abstract Theory of Argumentation That Accommodates Defeasible Reasoning About Preferences
ECSQARU '07 Proceedings of the 9th European Conference on Symbolic and Quantitative Approaches to Reasoning with Uncertainty
Social Viewpoints for Arguing about Coalitions
PRIMA '08 Proceedings of the 11th Pacific Rim International Conference on Multi-Agents: Intelligent Agents and Multi-Agent Systems
Proceedings of the 2006 conference on Computational Models of Argument: Proceedings of COMMA 2006
Integrating Object and Meta-Level Value Based Argumentation
Proceedings of the 2008 conference on Computational Models of Argument: Proceedings of COMMA 2008
Encompassing Attacks to Attacks in Abstract Argumentation Frameworks
ECSQARU '09 Proceedings of the 10th European Conference on Symbolic and Quantitative Approaches to Reasoning with Uncertainty
On the Acceptability of Meta-arguments
WI-IAT '09 Proceedings of the 2009 IEEE/WIC/ACM International Joint Conference on Web Intelligence and Intelligent Agent Technology - Volume 02
Coalitions of arguments: A tool for handling bipolar argumentation frameworks
International Journal of Intelligent Systems
Support in Abstract Argumentation
Proceedings of the 2010 conference on Computational Models of Argument: Proceedings of COMMA 2010
Moving Between Argumentation Frameworks
Proceedings of the 2010 conference on Computational Models of Argument: Proceedings of COMMA 2010
Consolidating multiple requirement specifications through argumentation
Proceedings of the 2011 ACM Symposium on Applied Computing
Arguing about the trustworthiness of the information sources
ECSQARU'11 Proceedings of the 11th European conference on Symbolic and quantitative approaches to reasoning with uncertainty
Bipolarity in argumentation graphs: towards a better understanding
SUM'11 Proceedings of the 5th international conference on Scalable uncertainty management
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
Journal of Logic and Computation
| Hi-index | 0.00 |
Cayrol and Lagasquie-Schiex introduce bipolar argumentation frameworks by introducing a second relation on the arguments for representing the support among them. The main drawback of their approach is that they cannot encode defeasible support, for instance they cannot model an attack towards a support relation. In this paper, we introduce a way to model defeasible support in bipolar argumentation frameworks. We use the methodology of meta-argumentation in which Dung's theory is used to reason about itself. Dung's well-known admissibility semantics can be used on this meta-argumentation framework to compute the acceptable arguments, and all properties of Dung's classical theory are preserved. Moreover, we show how different contexts can lead to the alternative strengthening of the support relation over the attack relation, and converse. Finally, we present two applications of our methodology for modeling support, the case of arguments provided with an internal structure and the case of abstract dialectical frameworks.