- New
-
Topics
- All Categories
- Metaphysics and Epistemology
- Value Theory
- Science, Logic, and Mathematics
- Science, Logic, and Mathematics
- Logic and Philosophy of Logic
- Philosophy of Biology
- Philosophy of Cognitive Science
- Philosophy of Computing and Information
- Philosophy of Mathematics
- Philosophy of Physical Science
- Philosophy of Social Science
- Philosophy of Probability
- General Philosophy of Science
- Philosophy of Science, Misc
- History of Western Philosophy
- Philosophical Traditions
- Philosophy, Misc
- Other Academic Areas
- Journals
- Submit material
- More
Audiences in argumentation frameworks
Artificial Intelligence 171 (1):42-71 (2007)
Abstract
This article has no associated abstract. (fix it)Other Versions
No versions found
My notes
Similar books and articles
The Notion of an Ideal Audience in Legal Argument (TREVOR JM BENCH-CAPON).G. C. Christie - 2001 - Artificial Intelligence and Law 9 (1):59-71.
Formalizing value-guided argumentation for ethical systems design.Bart Verheij - 2016 - Artificial Intelligence and Law 24 (4):387-407.
Acceptance in incomplete argumentation frameworks.Dorothea Baumeister, Matti Järvisalo, Daniel Neugebauer, Andreas Niskanen & Jörg Rothe - 2021 - Artificial Intelligence 295 (C):103470.
Verification in incomplete argumentation frameworks.Dorothea Baumeister, Daniel Neugebauer, Jörg Rothe & Hilmar Schadrack - 2018 - Artificial Intelligence 264 (C):1-26.
On the Input/Output behavior of argumentation frameworks.Pietro Baroni, Guido Boella, Federico Cerutti, Massimiliano Giacomin, Leendert van der Torre & Serena Villata - 2014 - Artificial Intelligence 217 (C):144-197.
Reasoning about preferences in argumentation frameworks.Sanjay Modgil - 2009 - Artificial Intelligence 173 (9-10):901-934.
Characterizing strong equivalence for argumentation frameworks.Emilia Oikarinen & Stefan Woltran - 2011 - Artificial Intelligence 175 (14-15):1985-2009.
Preservation of semantic properties in collective argumentation: The case of aggregating abstract argumentation frameworks.Weiwei Chen & Ulle Endriss - 2019 - Artificial Intelligence 269 (C):27-48.
The complexity landscape of claim-augmented argumentation frameworks.Wolfgang Dvořák, Alexander Greßler, Anna Rapberger & Stefan Woltran - 2023 - Artificial Intelligence 317 (C):103873.
Normal and strong expansion equivalence for argumentation frameworks.Ringo Baumann - 2012 - Artificial Intelligence 193 (C):18-44.
Analytics
Added to PP
2020-12-22
Downloads
18 (#1,002,099)
6 months
7 (#541,487)
2020-12-22
Downloads
18 (#1,002,099)
6 months
7 (#541,487)
Historical graph of downloads
Citations of this work
A general account of argumentation with preferences.Sanjay Modgil & Henry Prakken - 2013 - Artificial Intelligence 195 (C):361-397.
Reasoning about preferences in argumentation frameworks.Sanjay Modgil - 2009 - Artificial Intelligence 173 (9-10):901-934.
Practical reasoning as presumptive argumentation using action based alternating transition systems.Katie Atkinson & Trevor Bench-Capon - 2007 - Artificial Intelligence 171 (10-15):855-874.
Audiences in argumentation frameworks.Trevor J. M. Bench-Capon, Sylvie Doutre & Paul E. Dunne - 2007 - Artificial Intelligence 171 (1):42-71.
Weighted argument systems: Basic definitions, algorithms, and complexity results.Paul E. Dunne, Anthony Hunter, Peter McBurney, Simon Parsons & Michael Wooldridge - 2011 - Artificial Intelligence 175 (2):457-486.
References found in this work
On the acceptability of arguments and its fundamental role in nonmonotonic reasoning, logic programming and n-person games.Phan Minh Dung - 1995 - Artificial Intelligence 77 (2):321-357.
Semantic Considerations on nonmonotonic Logic.Robert C. Moore - 1985 - Artificial Intelligence 25 (1):75-94.
The Carneades model of argument and burden of proof.Thomas F. Gordon, Henry Prakken & Douglas Walton - 2007 - Artificial Intelligence 171 (10-15):875-896.
PhilPapers logo by Andrea Andrews and Meghan Driscoll.
This site uses cookies and Google Analytics (see our terms & conditions for details regarding the privacy implications). Use of this site is subject to terms & conditions.
All rights reserved by The PhilPapers Foundation
Server: philpapers-web-5d8df9484f-9zwsp uwo