Base logics in argumentation.
Frontiers in Artificial Intelligence and Applications
There are a number of frameworks for modelling argumentation in logic. They incorporate a formal representation of individual arguments and techniques for comparing conflicting arguments. A common assumption for logic-based argumentation is that an argument is a pair 〈Φ,α〉 where Φ is a minimal subset of the knowledgebase such that Φ is consistent and Φ entails the claim α. We call the logic used for consistency and entailment, the base logic. Different base logics provide different definitions for consistency and entailment and hence give us different options for argumentation. This paper discusses some of the commonly used base logics in logic-based argumentation, and considers various criteria that can be used to identify commonalities and differences between them. © 2010 The authors and IOS Press. All rights reserved.
|Title:||Base logics in argumentation|
|Keywords:||classical logic, consequence relations, defeasible logic, logic-based argumentation, logical argument systems|
|UCL classification:||UCL > School of BEAMS > Faculty of Engineering Science
UCL > School of BEAMS > Faculty of Engineering Science > Computer Science
Archive Staff Only