Logical models of argument

By Carlos Iván Chesñevar, Ana Gabriela Maguitman, R. Loui. CSUR, 2000

582 citations recorded by the source corpus.

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/01fb6de08817a382efb66ea756f7ffc229f61c5f

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

In Artificial Intelligence

Citations in the corpus

On the Acceptability of Arguments in Bipolar Argumentation Frameworks (2005, background): “Argumentation has been applied in various domains and applications such as plausible inference from inconsistent knowledge bases, decision making and negotiation (see [1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10]).”
Argumentation in artificial intelligence (2007, background): “A discussion of early influences on the development of argumentation models in AI may be found in the comprehensive survey of Chesnevar, Maguitman, and Loui [57], so we will be content merely to outline a few significant aspects, referring the reader to [57] for a more detailed exposition.”
Towards an argument interchange format (2006, background): “…have found a wide range of applications in both theoretical and practical branches of artiﬁcial intelligence and computer science , as outlined in various recent reviews ( Carbogim : et al ., 2000; Chesn˜evar et al ., 2000; Prakken & Vreeswijk , 2002, Rahwan et al ., 2003; Reed & Norman , 2004).”
A Relevance-theoretic Framework for Constructing and Deconstructing Enthymemes (2012, background): “In the development of logic-based argumentation systems, identifying and evaluating constellations of logical arguments and counterarguments has been the focus of interest (for example see [Pol92, SL92, Dun95, PS97, Vre97, AC02, Ben03, GS04, DKT06, ABC07, Mod07] and for reviews see [ CML00 , PV02, B”
Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number : 1072954 Registered office : (2004, background): “Defeasible logic programming (García and Simari 2004) provides a language for knowledge representation and reasoning that uses defeasible argumentation (Chesñevar et al. 2000; Prakken and Vreeswijk 2002; Simari and Loui 1992) to decide between contradictory conclusions through a dialectical analysis”