Prioritized norms in formal argumentation

Beishui Liao, Nir Oren, Leendert van der Torre (Corresponding Author), Serena Villata

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

8 Citations (Scopus)
11 Downloads (Pure)


To resolve conflicts amongst norms, various non-monotonic formalisms can be used to perform prioritized normative reasoning. Meanwhile, formal argumentation provides a way to represent non-monotonic logics. In this paper we propose a representation of prioritized normative reasoning by argumentation. Using hierarchical abstract normative systems (HANS), we define three kinds of prioritized normative reasoning approaches called Greedy, Reduction and Optimization. Then, after formulating an argumentation theory for a HANS, we show that for a totally ordered HANS, Greedy and Reduction can be represented in argumentation by applying the weakest link and the last link principles, respectively, and Optimization can be represented by introducing additional defeats capturing the idea that for each argument that contains a norm not belonging to the maximal obeyable set then this argument should be rejected.
Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)215-240
Number of pages26
JournalJournal of Logic and Computation
Issue number2
Early online date20 Mar 2018
Publication statusPublished - Mar 2019


  • Deontic logic
  • formal argumentation
  • norms
  • normative systems
  • normative multiagent systems


Dive into the research topics of 'Prioritized norms in formal argumentation'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this