The Added Value of Argumentation

Sanjay Modgil; Francesca Toni; Floris Bex; Ivan Bratko; Carlos I. Chesñevar; Wolfgang Dvořák; Marcelo A. Falappa; Xiuyi Fan; Sarah Alice Gaggl; Alejandro J. García; María P. González; Thomas F. Gordon; João Leite; Martin Možina; Chris Reed; Guillermo R. Simari; Stefan Szeider; Paolo Torroni; Stefan Woltran

doi:10.1007/978-94-007-5583-3_21

The Added Value of Argumentation

Sanjay Modgil^*, Francesca Toni, Floris Bex, Ivan Bratko, Carlos I. Chesñevar, Wolfgang Dvořák, Marcelo A. Falappa, Xiuyi Fan, Sarah Alice Gaggl, Alejandro J. García, María P. González, Thomas F. Gordon, João Leite, Martin Možina, Chris Reed, Guillermo R. Simari, Stefan Szeider, Paolo Torroni, Stefan Woltran

^*Corresponding author for this work

Research output: Chapter in Book/Report/Conference proceeding › Chapter › peer-review

12 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

We discuss the value of argumentation in reaching agreements, based on its capability for dealing with conflicts and uncertainty. Logic-based models of argumentation have recently emerged as a key topic within Artificial Intelligence. Key reasons for the success of these models is that they are akin to human models of reasoning and debate, and their generalisation to frameworks for modelling dialogues. They therefore have the potential for bridging between human and machine reasoning in the presence of uncertainty and conflict. We provide an overview of a number of examples that bear witness to this potential, and that illustrate the added value of argumentation. These examples amount to methods and techniques for argumentation to aid machine reasoning (e.g. in the form of machine learning and belief functions) on the one hand and methods and techniques for argumentation to aid human reasoning (e.g. for various forms of decision making and deliberation and for the Web) on the other. We also identify a number of open challenges if this potential is to be realised, and in particular the need for benchmark libraries.

Original language	English
Title of host publication	Law, Governance and Technology Series
Publisher	Springer Nature
Pages	357-403
Number of pages	47
DOIs	https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-007-5583-3_21
Publication status	Published - 2013

Publication series

Name	Law, Governance and Technology Series
Volume	8
ISSN (Print)	2352-1902
ISSN (Electronic)	2352-1910

Keywords

Abstract Argumentation
Argument Scheme
Argumentation Framework
Belief Function
Induction Logic Programming

Access to Document

10.1007/978-94-007-5583-3_21

Cite this

Modgil, S., Toni, F., Bex, F., Bratko, I., Chesñevar, C. I., Dvořák, W., Falappa, M. A., Fan, X., Gaggl, S. A., García, A. J., González, M. P., Gordon, T. F., Leite, J., Možina, M., Reed, C., Simari, G. R., Szeider, S., Torroni, P., & Woltran, S. (2013). The Added Value of Argumentation. In Law, Governance and Technology Series (pp. 357-403). (Law, Governance and Technology Series; Vol. 8). Springer Nature. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-007-5583-3_21

@inbook{57cfe4adc6254ca6b9b70ad343b7b05f,

title = "The Added Value of Argumentation",

abstract = "We discuss the value of argumentation in reaching agreements, based on its capability for dealing with conflicts and uncertainty. Logic-based models of argumentation have recently emerged as a key topic within Artificial Intelligence. Key reasons for the success of these models is that they are akin to human models of reasoning and debate, and their generalisation to frameworks for modelling dialogues. They therefore have the potential for bridging between human and machine reasoning in the presence of uncertainty and conflict. We provide an overview of a number of examples that bear witness to this potential, and that illustrate the added value of argumentation. These examples amount to methods and techniques for argumentation to aid machine reasoning (e.g. in the form of machine learning and belief functions) on the one hand and methods and techniques for argumentation to aid human reasoning (e.g. for various forms of decision making and deliberation and for the Web) on the other. We also identify a number of open challenges if this potential is to be realised, and in particular the need for benchmark libraries.",

keywords = "Abstract Argumentation, Argument Scheme, Argumentation Framework, Belief Function, Induction Logic Programming",

author = "Sanjay Modgil and Francesca Toni and Floris Bex and Ivan Bratko and Ches{\~n}evar, {Carlos I.} and Wolfgang Dvo{\v r}{\'a}k and Falappa, {Marcelo A.} and Xiuyi Fan and Gaggl, {Sarah Alice} and Garc{\'i}a, {Alejandro J.} and Gonz{\'a}lez, {Mar{\'i}a P.} and Gordon, {Thomas F.} and Jo{\~a}o Leite and Martin Mo{\v z}ina and Chris Reed and Simari, {Guillermo R.} and Stefan Szeider and Paolo Torroni and Stefan Woltran",

note = "Publisher Copyright: {\textcopyright} 2013, Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht.",

year = "2013",

doi = "10.1007/978-94-007-5583-3_21",

language = "English",

series = "Law, Governance and Technology Series",

publisher = "Springer Nature",

pages = "357--403",

booktitle = "Law, Governance and Technology Series",

address = "Germany",

}

Modgil, S, Toni, F, Bex, F, Bratko, I, Chesñevar, CI, Dvořák, W, Falappa, MA, Fan, X, Gaggl, SA, García, AJ, González, MP, Gordon, TF, Leite, J, Možina, M, Reed, C, Simari, GR, Szeider, S, Torroni, P & Woltran, S 2013, The Added Value of Argumentation. in Law, Governance and Technology Series. Law, Governance and Technology Series, vol. 8, Springer Nature, pp. 357-403. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-007-5583-3_21

TY - CHAP

T1 - The Added Value of Argumentation

AU - Modgil, Sanjay

AU - Toni, Francesca

AU - Bex, Floris

AU - Bratko, Ivan

AU - Chesñevar, Carlos I.

AU - Dvořák, Wolfgang

AU - Falappa, Marcelo A.

AU - Fan, Xiuyi

AU - Gaggl, Sarah Alice

AU - García, Alejandro J.

AU - González, María P.

AU - Gordon, Thomas F.

AU - Leite, João

AU - Možina, Martin

AU - Reed, Chris

AU - Simari, Guillermo R.

AU - Szeider, Stefan

AU - Torroni, Paolo

AU - Woltran, Stefan

PY - 2013

Y1 - 2013

N2 - We discuss the value of argumentation in reaching agreements, based on its capability for dealing with conflicts and uncertainty. Logic-based models of argumentation have recently emerged as a key topic within Artificial Intelligence. Key reasons for the success of these models is that they are akin to human models of reasoning and debate, and their generalisation to frameworks for modelling dialogues. They therefore have the potential for bridging between human and machine reasoning in the presence of uncertainty and conflict. We provide an overview of a number of examples that bear witness to this potential, and that illustrate the added value of argumentation. These examples amount to methods and techniques for argumentation to aid machine reasoning (e.g. in the form of machine learning and belief functions) on the one hand and methods and techniques for argumentation to aid human reasoning (e.g. for various forms of decision making and deliberation and for the Web) on the other. We also identify a number of open challenges if this potential is to be realised, and in particular the need for benchmark libraries.

AB - We discuss the value of argumentation in reaching agreements, based on its capability for dealing with conflicts and uncertainty. Logic-based models of argumentation have recently emerged as a key topic within Artificial Intelligence. Key reasons for the success of these models is that they are akin to human models of reasoning and debate, and their generalisation to frameworks for modelling dialogues. They therefore have the potential for bridging between human and machine reasoning in the presence of uncertainty and conflict. We provide an overview of a number of examples that bear witness to this potential, and that illustrate the added value of argumentation. These examples amount to methods and techniques for argumentation to aid machine reasoning (e.g. in the form of machine learning and belief functions) on the one hand and methods and techniques for argumentation to aid human reasoning (e.g. for various forms of decision making and deliberation and for the Web) on the other. We also identify a number of open challenges if this potential is to be realised, and in particular the need for benchmark libraries.

KW - Abstract Argumentation

KW - Argument Scheme

KW - Argumentation Framework

KW - Belief Function

KW - Induction Logic Programming

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85145049221&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1007/978-94-007-5583-3_21

DO - 10.1007/978-94-007-5583-3_21

M3 - Chapter

AN - SCOPUS:85145049221

T3 - Law, Governance and Technology Series

SP - 357

EP - 403

BT - Law, Governance and Technology Series

PB - Springer Nature

ER -

The Added Value of Argumentation

Abstract

Publication series

Keywords

Access to Document

Other files and links

Fingerprint

Cite this