Abstract
One of the main challenges that faces the AI-community is to express close approximations of human reasoning as computational formalizations of argument. In this paper we present a full implementation and accompanying software for defeasible adversarial argumentation. The work is based on the metalogic framework of defeasible adversarial argumentation games of [9]. The software we developed consists of: a meta-interpreter, a declarative implementation of the argumentation game model and a graphical interface developed in Java that shows the results of the game execution and the construction of the argumentation derivation tree.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Preview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Antoniou, G., Billington, D., Governatori, G., Maher, M.J.: A flexible framework for defeasible logics. In: 17th American National Conference on Artificial Intelligence, AAAI 2000 (2000)
Antoniou, G., Billington, D., Governatori, G., Maher, M.J., Rock, A.: A family of defeasible reasoning logics and its implementation. In: Proc. of the 14th European Conference on Artificial Intelligence, pp. 459–463. IOS Press, Amsterdam (2000)
Antoniou, G., Bikakis, A.: Dr-prolog: A system for defeasible reasoning with rules and ontologies on the semantic web. IEEE Trans. on Knowl. and Data Eng. 19, 233–245 (2007)
Billington, D.: The proof algorithms of plausible logic form a hierarchy. In: Zhang, S., Jarvis, R.A. (eds.) AI 2005. LNCS (LNAI), vol. 3809, pp. 796–799. Springer, Heidelberg (2005)
Billington, D., Estivill-Castro, V., Hexel, R., Rock, A.: Using temporal consistency to improve robot localisation. In: Lakemeyer, G., Sklar, E., Sorrenti, D.G., Takahashi, T. (eds.) RoboCup 2006: Robot Soccer World Cup X. LNCS (LNAI), vol. 4434, pp. 232–244. Springer, Heidelberg (2007)
Brewka, G.: A reconstruction of rescher’s theory of formal disputation based on default logic. In: Proceedings of the 11th European Conference on Artificial Intelligence, pp. 336–370 (1994)
Chesñevar, C.I., Maguitman, A.G., Loui, R.P.: Logical models of argument. ACM Computing Surveys, 32(4) (2000)
Dung, P.M.: On the acceptability of arguments and its fundamental role in non-monotonic reasoning and logic programming and n-person game. Artificial Intelligence 77, 321–357 (1995)
Eriksson Lundström, J.: On the Formal Modeling of Games of Language and Adversarial Argumentation - A Logic-Based Artificial Intelligence Approach (2009)
Eriksson Lundström, J., Hamfelt, A., Fischer Nilsson, J.: A common framework for board games and argumentation games. In: EJC 2008. IOS Press, Amsterdam (2008)
Gordon, T.: The Pleadings Game: An artificial intelligence model of procedural justice. Journal of Artificial Intelligence and Law, 2(4) (1993)
Governatori, G., Antoniou, G., Billington, D., Maher, M.J.: Argumentation semantics for defeasible logics. Journal of Logic and Computation 14(5) (2004)
Grosof, B.N.: Representing e-commerce rules via situated courteous logic programs in ruleml. Electronic Commerce Research and Applications 3(1), 2–20 (2004)
Hamfelt, A., Eriksson Lundström, J., Nilsson, J.F.: A metalogic formalization of legal argumentation as game trees with defeasible reasoning. In: ICAIL 2005, Int. Conference on AI and Law, Bologna, Italy, pp. 250–251 (2005)
Hill, P.M., Lloyd, J.W.: Analysis of Meta-Programs. In: Abramson, H., Rogers, M.H. (eds.) Meta-Programming in Logic Programming. MIT Press, Cambridge (1989)
Maher, M.J., Rock, A., Antoniou, G., Billington, D., Miller, T.: Efficient defeasible reasoning systems. International Journal on Artificial Intelligence Tools 10(4), 483–501 (2001)
Nute, D., Maier, F.: Ambiguity propagating defeasible logic and the well-founded semantics. In: Fisher, M., van der Hoek, W., Konev, B., Lisitsa, A. (eds.) JELIA 2006. LNCS (LNAI), vol. 4160, pp. 306–318. Springer, Heidelberg (2006)
Nilsson, N.J.: Artificial Intelligence: A New Synthesis. Morgan Kaufmann, California (1998)
Nute, D.: Defeasible logic. In: Handbook of Logic in Artificial Intelligence and Logic Programming, vol. 3, pp. 353–395. Oxford University Press, Oxford (1994)
Nute, D., Covington, M.A., Vellino, A.: Prolog Programming in Depth. Scott Foresman and Co., Chicago (1998)
Prakken, H., Sartor, G.: Presumptions and burdens of proof. In: Jurix 2006, pp. 21–30. IOS Press, Amsterdam (1996)
Prakken, H., Sartor, G.: Modelling reasoning with precedents in a formal dialogue game. AI and Law 2(4), 231–287 (1998)
Prakken, H., Sartor, G.: Formalising arguments about the burden of persuation. In: ICAIL 2007, pp. 97–106. ACM Press, New York (2007)
Prakken, H., Vreeswijk, G.: Logical systems for defeasible argumentation. In: Gabbay, D.M. (ed.) Handbook of Philosophical Logic, pp. 219–318 (2002)
Reiter, R.: A logic for default reasoning. AI 13(1), 81–132 (1980)
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2011 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg
About this paper
Cite this paper
Eriksson Lundström, J.S.Z., Aceto, G., Hamfelt, A. (2011). A Dynamic Metalogic Argumentation Framework Implementation. In: Bassiliades, N., Governatori, G., Paschke, A. (eds) Rule-Based Reasoning, Programming, and Applications. RuleML 2011. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol 6826. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-22546-8_8
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-22546-8_8
Publisher Name: Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg
Print ISBN: 978-3-642-22545-1
Online ISBN: 978-3-642-22546-8
eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)