Making Argumentation More Believable

@inproceedings{Hunter2004MakingAM,
  title={Making Argumentation More Believable},
  author={Anthony Hunter},
  booktitle={AAAI},
  year={2004}
}
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 problem with these proposals is that they do not consider the believability of the arguments from the perspective of the intended audience. In this paper, we start by reviewing a logic-based framework for argumentation based on argument trees which provide a way of exhaustively collating arguments and… CONTINUE READING

From This Paper

Figures, tables, and topics from this paper.

References

Publications referenced by this paper.
Showing 1-8 of 8 references

Evaluating the significance of inconsistency

  • A. Hunter
  • Proceedings of the International Joint Conference…
  • 2003
2 Excerpts

Quantifying information and contradiction in propositional logic through epistemic actions

  • S. Konieczny, J. Lang, P. Marquis
  • Proceedings of the 18th International Joint…
  • 2003

Logical systems for defeasible argumentation

  • H. Prakken, G. Vreeswijk
  • Gabbay, D., ed., Handbook of Philosophical Logic…
  • 2000
1 Excerpt

Similar Papers

Loading similar papers…