Argumentation is an important cognitive process for dealing with conflicting information by generating and/or comparing arguments. Often it is based on constructing and comparing deductive arguments. These are arguments that involve some premises (which we refer to as the support of the argument) and a conclusion (which we refer to as the claim of the argument) such that the support deductively entails the claim.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Preview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
L. Amgoud and C. Cayrol. On the acceptability of arguments in preference-based argumentation. In G. Cooper and S. Moral, editors, Proceedings of the 14th Conference on Uncertainty in Artificial Intelligence (UAI 1998), pages 1–7. Morgan Kaufmann, 1998.
Ph. Besnard, A. Hunter, and S. Woltran. Encoding deductive argumentation in quantified boolean formulae. Technical Report DBAI-TR-2008-60, Database and Artificial Intelligence Group, Institute of Information Systems, Technischen Universität Wien, 2008.
Ph. Besnard and A. Hunter. A logic-based theory of deductive arguments. Artificial Intelligence, 128:203–235, 2001.
Ph. Besnard and A. Hunter. Practical first-order argumentation. In Proceedings of the 20th National Conference on Artificial Intelligence (AAAI 2005), pages 590–595. MIT Press,2005.
Ph. Besnard and A. Hunter. Knowledgebase compilation for efficient logical argumentation. In Proceedings of the 10th International Conference on Knowledge Representation (KR 2006), pages 123–133. AAAI Press, 2006.
Ph. Besnard and A. Hunter. Elements of Argumentation. MIT Press, 2008.
E. Black and A. Hunter. Using enthymemes in an inquiry dialogue system. In Proceedings of the Seventh International Joint Conference on Autonomous Agents and Multi-Agent Systems (AAMAS´08), pages 437–444. ACM Press, 2008.
M. Caminada and L. Amgoud. An axiomatic account of formal argumentation. In Proceedings of the 20th National Conference on Artificial Intelligence (AAAI 2005), pages 608–613, 2005.
M. Caminada. On the issue of contraposition of defeasible rules. In Computational Models of Argument: Proceedings of COMMA 2008, pages 109–115. IOS Press, 2008.
C. Chesñevar, A. Maguitman, and R. Loui. Logical models of argument. ACM Computing Surveys, 32:337–383, 2000.
P. Dung, R. Kowalski, and F. Toni. Dialectical proof procedures for assumption-based admissible argumentation. Artificial Intelligence, 170:114–159, 2006.
V. Efstathiou and A. Hunter. Algorithms for effective argumentation in classical propositional logic. In Proceedings of the International Symposium on Foundations of Information and Knowledge Systems (FOIKS´08), volume 4932 of LNCS, pages 272–290. Springer, 2008.
V. Efstathiou and A. Hunter. Focused search for arguments from propositional knowledge. In Computation Models of Argument: Proceedings of COMMA 2008, pages 159–170. IOS Press, 2008.
J. Fox, P. Krause, and M. Elvang-Gøransson. Argumentation as a general framework for uncertain reasoning. In Proceedings of the 9th Conference on Uncertainty in Artificial Intelligence (UAI 1993), pages 428–434. Morgan Kaufmann, 1993.
A. GarcÃa and G. Simari. Defeasible logic programming: An argumentative approach. Theory and Practice of Logic Programming, 4:95–138, 2004.
A. Hunter. Real arguments are approximate arguments. In Proceedings of the 22nd AAAI Conference on Artificial Intelligence (AAAI´07), pages 66–71. MIT Press, 2007.
A. Hunter. Reasoning about the appropriateness of proponents for arguments. In Proceedings of the 23rd AAAI Conference on Artificial Intelligence (AAAI´08). MIT Press, 2008.
N. Mann and A. Hunter. Argumentation using temporal knowledge. In Computational Models of Argument: Proceedings of COMMA´08, pages 204–215. IOS Press, 2008.
D. Nute. Defeasible logics. In Handbook of Logic in Artificial Intelligence and Logic Programming, Volume 3: Nonmonotonic Reasoning and Uncertainty Reasoning, pages 355–395. Oxford University Press, 1994.
J. Pollock. How to reason defeasibly. Artificial Intelligence, 57:1–42, 1992.
H. Prakken and G. Sartor. Argument-based extended logic programming with defeasible priorities. Journal of Applied Non-classical Logic, 7:25–75, 1997.
H. Prakken and G. Vreeswijk. Logical systems for defeasible argumentation. In D. Gabbay, editor, Handbook of Philosophical Logic, pages 219–318. Kluwer, 2002.
G. Simari and R. Loui. A mathematical treatment of defeasible reasoning and its implementation. Artificial Intelligence, 53:125–157, 1992.
B. Verheij. Automated argument assistance for lawyers. In Proceedings of the 7th International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Law (ICAIL 1999), pages 43–52. ACM Press, 1999.
G. Vreeswijk. Abstract argumentation systems. Artificial Intelligence, 90:225–279, 1997.
Acknowledgments
We wish to thank Maria Vanina Martinez for feedback on an earlier draft of this chapter.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2009 Springer-Verlag US
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Besnard, P., Hunter, A. (2009). Argumentation Based on Classical Logic. In: Simari, G., Rahwan, I. (eds) Argumentation in Artificial Intelligence. Springer, Boston, MA. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-0-387-98197-0_7
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-0-387-98197-0_7
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Boston, MA
Print ISBN: 978-0-387-98196-3
Online ISBN: 978-0-387-98197-0
eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)