Persuasion in Practical Argument Using Value-based Argumentation Frameworks

By Trevor J. M. Bench-Capon. Journal of Logic and Computation, 2003

901 citations recorded by the source corpus.

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/ac1f090bd4a6dd5dfac17500335fa9fd27aef88d

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

Ontology Matching (2007, background): “2006), arguments are expressed following the value-based argumentation framework (Bench-Capon 2003).”
On the evaluation of argumentation formalisms (2007, neutral): “[3,8,10,14,18,35–38,41]).”
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”
A dialogue system specification for explanation (2011, background): “systems have been built (Bench-Capon 2003; Prakken 2005, 2006), and through their applications (Verheij 2003), we are getting a much better idea of the general requirements for such systems, and how to build them. Reed (2006) has provided a dialogue system specification that enables anyone to constr”
Weighted argument systems: Basic definitions, algorithms, and complexity results (2011, methodology): “Although there are several different perspectives on argumentation, a common view is that argumentation starts with a collection of statements, called arguments, which are related through the notions of support and attack.”
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, methodology): “Among the earliest argumentation-based presentations of MacKenzie's ideas beyond their use in recognising a specific class of fallacious reasoning, are those of Moore [130] and Bench-Capon, Dunne, and Leng [31].”
A general account of argumentation with preferences (2013, background): “Specifically, we : i) posit criteria for defining attack relations, given their dual role in declaratively denoting the mutual incompatibility of the information contained in the attacking arguments, and their dialectical use; ii) motivate the distinction between preference dependent and preference ”
On principle-based evaluation of extension-based argumentation semantics (2007, neutral): “preference-based [1] or value-based [7] argumentation frameworks).”