An abstract and structured account of dialectical argument strength

IF 5.1 2区 计算机科学 Q1 COMPUTER SCIENCE, ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE
Henry Prakken
{"title":"An abstract and structured account of dialectical argument strength","authors":"Henry Prakken","doi":"10.1016/j.artint.2024.104193","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>This paper presents a formal model of dialectical argument strength in terms of the number of ways in which an argument can be successfully attacked in expansions of an abstract argumentation framework. First a model is proposed that is abstract but designed to avoid overly limiting assumptions on instantiations or dialogue contexts. It is then shown that most principles for argument strength proposed in the literature fail to hold for the proposed notions of dialectical strength, which clarifies the rational foundations of these principles and highlights the importance of distinguishing between kinds of argument strength, in particular logical, dialectical and rhetorical argument strength. The abstract model is then instantiated with <em>ASPIC</em><sup>+</sup> to test the claim that it does not make overly limiting assumptions on the structure of arguments and the nature of their relations.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":8434,"journal":{"name":"Artificial Intelligence","volume":"335 ","pages":"Article 104193"},"PeriodicalIF":5.1000,"publicationDate":"2024-07-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0004370224001292/pdfft?md5=ccf1642809aafb2e2582cad1cfca01a9&pid=1-s2.0-S0004370224001292-main.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Artificial Intelligence","FirstCategoryId":"94","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0004370224001292","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"计算机科学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"COMPUTER SCIENCE, ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

This paper presents a formal model of dialectical argument strength in terms of the number of ways in which an argument can be successfully attacked in expansions of an abstract argumentation framework. First a model is proposed that is abstract but designed to avoid overly limiting assumptions on instantiations or dialogue contexts. It is then shown that most principles for argument strength proposed in the literature fail to hold for the proposed notions of dialectical strength, which clarifies the rational foundations of these principles and highlights the importance of distinguishing between kinds of argument strength, in particular logical, dialectical and rhetorical argument strength. The abstract model is then instantiated with ASPIC+ to test the claim that it does not make overly limiting assumptions on the structure of arguments and the nature of their relations.

抽象而有条理地阐述辩证论证的力量
本文提出了一个辩证论证强度的正式模型,即在抽象论证框架的扩展中,论证可以成功攻击的方式数量。首先,本文提出了一个抽象模型,但旨在避免对实例或对话语境的过度限制性假设。然后证明了文献中提出的大多数论证强度原则对于所提出的辩证强度概念都是不成立的,这澄清了这些原则的合理性基础,并强调了区分论证强度类型的重要性,尤其是逻辑、辩证和修辞论证强度。然后,我们将抽象模型实例化,以检验该模型是否对论证结构及其关系的性质做出了过度限制性的假设。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Artificial Intelligence
Artificial Intelligence 工程技术-计算机:人工智能
CiteScore
11.20
自引率
1.40%
发文量
118
审稿时长
8 months
期刊介绍: The Journal of Artificial Intelligence (AIJ) welcomes papers covering a broad spectrum of AI topics, including cognition, automated reasoning, computer vision, machine learning, and more. Papers should demonstrate advancements in AI and propose innovative approaches to AI problems. Additionally, the journal accepts papers describing AI applications, focusing on how new methods enhance performance rather than reiterating conventional approaches. In addition to regular papers, AIJ also accepts Research Notes, Research Field Reviews, Position Papers, Book Reviews, and summary papers on AI challenges and competitions.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信