Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Change in Argumentation Systems: Exploring the Interest of Removing an Argument

  • Conference paper
Scalable Uncertainty Management (SUM 2011)

Part of the book series: Lecture Notes in Computer Science ((LNAI,volume 6929))

Included in the following conference series:

Abstract

This article studies a specific kind of change in an argumentation system: the removal of an argument and its interactions. We illustrate this operation in a legal context and we establish the conditions to obtain some desirable properties when removing an argument.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 39.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 54.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Alchourrón, C., Gärdenfors, P., Makinson, D.: On the logic of theory change: partial meet contraction and revision functions. Journal of Symbolic Logic 50, 510–530 (1985)

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  2. Amgoud, L., Cayrol, C.: Inferring from inconsistency in preference-based argumentation frameworks. International Journal of Automated Reasoning 29(2), 125–169 (2002)

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  3. Amgoud, L., Dupin de Saint-Cyr, F.: Extracting the core of a persuasion dialog to evaluate its quality. In: Sossai, C., Chemello, G. (eds.) ECSQARU 2009. LNCS (LNAI), vol. 5590, pp. 59–70. Springer, Heidelberg (2009)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  4. Amgoud, L., Maudet, N., Parsons, S.: Modelling dialogues using argumentation. In: Proc. of ICMAS, pp. 31–38 (2000)

    Google Scholar 

  5. Baumann, R., Brewka, G.: Expanding argumentation frameworks: Enforcing and monotonicity results. In: Proc. of COMMA, pp. 75–86. IOS Press, Amsterdam (2010)

    Google Scholar 

  6. Boella, G., Kaci, S., van der Torre, L.: Dynamics in argumentation with single extensions: Abstraction principles and the grounded extension. In: Sossai, C., Chemello, G. (eds.) ECSQARU 2009. LNCS (LNAI), vol. 5590, pp. 107–118. Springer, Heidelberg (2009)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  7. Boella, G., Kaci, S., van der Torre, L.: Dynamics in argumentation with single extensions: Attack refinement and the grounded extension. In: Proc. of AAMAS, pp. 1213–1214 (2009)

    Google Scholar 

  8. Brewka, G.: Dynamic argument systems: A formal model of argumentation processes based on situation calculus. Journal of Logic and Computation 11(2), 257–282 (2001)

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  9. Cayrol, C., Dupin de Saint Cyr, F., Lagasquie-Schiex, M.-C.: Change in Abstract Argumentation Frameworks: Adding an Argument. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 38, 49–84 (2010)

    MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  10. Dung, P.M.: On the acceptability of arguments and its fundamental role in nonmonotonic reasoning, logic programming and n-person games. Artificial Intelligence 77(2), 321–358 (1995)

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  11. Moguillansky, M.O., Rotstein, N.D., Falappa, M.A., García, A.J., Simari, G.R.: Argument theory change through defeater activation. In: Proc. of COMMA 2010, pp. 359–366. IOS Press, Amsterdam (2010)

    Google Scholar 

  12. Rahwan, I., Larson, K., Tohmé, F.: A characterisation of strategy-proofness for grounded argumentation semantics. In: Proc. of IJCAI 2009, pp. 251–256 (2009)

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. IRIT, Université Paul Sabatier, 31062, Toulouse Cedex 9, France

    Pierre Bisquert, Claudette Cayrol, Florence Dupin de Saint-Cyr & Marie-Christine Lagasquie-Schiex

Authors
  1. Pierre Bisquert
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Claudette Cayrol
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Florence Dupin de Saint-Cyr
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Marie-Christine Lagasquie-Schiex
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. CRIL-CNRS, University of Artois, 62307, France

    Salem Benferhat

  2. Department of Mathematics, Towson University, 21252, Towson, MD, USA

    John Grant

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2011 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg

About this paper

Cite this paper

Bisquert, P., Cayrol, C., de Saint-Cyr, F.D., Lagasquie-Schiex, MC. (2011). Change in Argumentation Systems: Exploring the Interest of Removing an Argument. In: Benferhat, S., Grant, J. (eds) Scalable Uncertainty Management. SUM 2011. Lecture Notes in Computer Science(), vol 6929. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-23963-2_22

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-23963-2_22

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-642-23962-5

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-642-23963-2

  • eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation