Senses of ‘argument’ in instantiated argumentation frameworks

Adam Wyner, Trevor Bench-Capon, Paul Dunne, Federico Cerruti

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

8 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Argumentation Frameworks (AFs) provide a fruitful basis for exploring issues of defeasible reasoning. Their power largely derives from the abstract nature of the arguments within the framework, where arguments are atomic nodes in an undifferentiated relation of attack. This abstraction conceals different senses of argument, namely a single-step reason to a claim, a series of reasoning steps to a single claim, and reasoning steps for and against a claim. Concrete instantiations encounter difficulties and complexities as a result of conflating these senses. To distinguish them, we provide an approach to instantiating AFs in which the nodes are restricted to literals and rules, encoding the underlying theory directly. Arguments in these senses emerge from this framework as distinctive structures of nodes and paths. As a consequence of the approach, we reduce the effort of computing argumentation extensions, which is in contrast to other approaches. Our framework retains the theoretical and computational benefits of an abstract AF, distinguishes senses of argument, and efficiently computes extensions. Given the mixed intended audience of the paper, the style of presentation is semi-formal.
Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)50-72
Number of pages23
JournalArgument and Computation
Volume6
Issue number1
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 2 Jan 2015

Fingerprint

Argumentation
argumentation
Reasoning
Vertex of a graph
abstraction
Framework
Encoding
Attack
Path
Series
Computing

Keywords

  • argumentation frameworks
  • logic
  • case-based reasoning
  • instantiated argumentation
  • structured argumentation
  • logic

Cite this

Senses of ‘argument’ in instantiated argumentation frameworks. / Wyner, Adam; Bench-Capon, Trevor; Dunne, Paul; Cerruti, Federico.

In: Argument and Computation, Vol. 6, No. 1, 02.01.2015, p. 50-72.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Wyner, Adam ; Bench-Capon, Trevor ; Dunne, Paul ; Cerruti, Federico. / Senses of ‘argument’ in instantiated argumentation frameworks. In: Argument and Computation. 2015 ; Vol. 6, No. 1. pp. 50-72.
@article{8906a4ae0f6949ba864198e2b5cd8144,
title = "Senses of ‘argument’ in instantiated argumentation frameworks",
abstract = "Argumentation Frameworks (AFs) provide a fruitful basis for exploring issues of defeasible reasoning. Their power largely derives from the abstract nature of the arguments within the framework, where arguments are atomic nodes in an undifferentiated relation of attack. This abstraction conceals different senses of argument, namely a single-step reason to a claim, a series of reasoning steps to a single claim, and reasoning steps for and against a claim. Concrete instantiations encounter difficulties and complexities as a result of conflating these senses. To distinguish them, we provide an approach to instantiating AFs in which the nodes are restricted to literals and rules, encoding the underlying theory directly. Arguments in these senses emerge from this framework as distinctive structures of nodes and paths. As a consequence of the approach, we reduce the effort of computing argumentation extensions, which is in contrast to other approaches. Our framework retains the theoretical and computational benefits of an abstract AF, distinguishes senses of argument, and efficiently computes extensions. Given the mixed intended audience of the paper, the style of presentation is semi-formal.",
keywords = "argumentation frameworks, logic , case-based reasoning, instantiated argumentation, structured argumentation, logic",
author = "Adam Wyner and Trevor Bench-Capon and Paul Dunne and Federico Cerruti",
year = "2015",
month = "1",
day = "2",
doi = "10.1080/19462166.2014.1002535",
language = "English",
volume = "6",
pages = "50--72",
journal = "Argument and Computation",
issn = "1946-2166",
publisher = "Taylor & Francis",
number = "1",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Senses of ‘argument’ in instantiated argumentation frameworks

AU - Wyner, Adam

AU - Bench-Capon, Trevor

AU - Dunne, Paul

AU - Cerruti, Federico

PY - 2015/1/2

Y1 - 2015/1/2

N2 - Argumentation Frameworks (AFs) provide a fruitful basis for exploring issues of defeasible reasoning. Their power largely derives from the abstract nature of the arguments within the framework, where arguments are atomic nodes in an undifferentiated relation of attack. This abstraction conceals different senses of argument, namely a single-step reason to a claim, a series of reasoning steps to a single claim, and reasoning steps for and against a claim. Concrete instantiations encounter difficulties and complexities as a result of conflating these senses. To distinguish them, we provide an approach to instantiating AFs in which the nodes are restricted to literals and rules, encoding the underlying theory directly. Arguments in these senses emerge from this framework as distinctive structures of nodes and paths. As a consequence of the approach, we reduce the effort of computing argumentation extensions, which is in contrast to other approaches. Our framework retains the theoretical and computational benefits of an abstract AF, distinguishes senses of argument, and efficiently computes extensions. Given the mixed intended audience of the paper, the style of presentation is semi-formal.

AB - Argumentation Frameworks (AFs) provide a fruitful basis for exploring issues of defeasible reasoning. Their power largely derives from the abstract nature of the arguments within the framework, where arguments are atomic nodes in an undifferentiated relation of attack. This abstraction conceals different senses of argument, namely a single-step reason to a claim, a series of reasoning steps to a single claim, and reasoning steps for and against a claim. Concrete instantiations encounter difficulties and complexities as a result of conflating these senses. To distinguish them, we provide an approach to instantiating AFs in which the nodes are restricted to literals and rules, encoding the underlying theory directly. Arguments in these senses emerge from this framework as distinctive structures of nodes and paths. As a consequence of the approach, we reduce the effort of computing argumentation extensions, which is in contrast to other approaches. Our framework retains the theoretical and computational benefits of an abstract AF, distinguishes senses of argument, and efficiently computes extensions. Given the mixed intended audience of the paper, the style of presentation is semi-formal.

KW - argumentation frameworks

KW - logic

KW - case-based reasoning

KW - instantiated argumentation

KW - structured argumentation

KW - logic

U2 - 10.1080/19462166.2014.1002535

DO - 10.1080/19462166.2014.1002535

M3 - Article

VL - 6

SP - 50

EP - 72

JO - Argument and Computation

JF - Argument and Computation

SN - 1946-2166

IS - 1

ER -