Wyniki wyszukiwania - BazTech

Ograniczanie wyników

Znaleziono wyników: 2

Liczba wyników na stronie

Wyniki wyszukiwania

Wyszukiwano:
w słowach kluczowych: defeasible reasoning

Sortuj według:

Ogranicz wyniki do:

Relating Concrete Defeasible Reasoning Formalisms and Abstract Argumentation

Maher M. J.

Fundamenta Informaticae

2017

Vol. 155, nr 3

233--260

There are a wide variety of formalisms for defeasible reasoning that can be seen as implementing concrete argumentation on defeasible rules. However there has been little work on the relationship between such languages and Dung’s abstract argumentation. In this paper we identify two small fragments of defeasible rule languages on which many concrete defeasible formalisms agree. The two fragments are closely related, as we show. Both arise as ways to express abstract argumentation frameworks in the concrete formalisms. Using these fragments, we establish a close relationship between abstract argumentation under semantics based on complete extensions, and ambiguity blocking logics in the framework of Antoniou et al. These results support a uniform approach to deriving complexity lower bounds for defeasible formalisms, where a lower bound is established for abstract argumentation and can then be extended “for free” to corresponding concrete defeasible formalisms.

Funkcje współczesnej teorii argumentacji

Skulska J. K.

Nowoczesne Systemy Zarządzania

2012

T. 7, nr 1

249--265

This text is a critical review of basic concepts related to the theory of argumentation, and shows, by using some examples, the place of diagrams of arguments in the modern theory of argumentation. At the same time they are accommodated in the presentation of the basic tools of argument, such as argumentation diagrams, which are an integral part of research into the argument. Moreover, also brings out software analysis tool supporting argument, called Araucaria. In this critical review I refer to a brief review of the literature, including the works by Hamblin (1970), Johnson and Blair (1987), Walton, Reed and Macagno, allowing you to show7 the theory of argumentation in a broader context and its evaluation is essential in the study of the modern theory of argumentation. Referring to the canon of literature on research on patterns of reasoning (Hastings, Perelman and Olbrechts-Tyteca, van Emeren and Grootendorst, Kienpointner and Walton) trying to get the essential characteristics of precarious (called defeasible) reasoning. The basis for the model year and characterization of patterns of argument will be a proposal made in research D. Waltona.