Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Argument construction and reinstatement in logics for defeasible reasoning

  • Published:
Artificial Intelligence and Law Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

This paper points out some problems with two recent logical systems – one due to Prakken and Sartor, the other due to Kowalski and Toni – designedfor the representation of defeasible arguments in general, but with a specialemphasis on legal reasoning.

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

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Bondarenko, A., Dung, P. M., Kowalski, R. and Toni, F. (1997). An abstract, argumentation-theoretic approach to default reasoning. Artificial Intelligence 93: 63-101.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dung, P. M. (1995). On the acceptability of arguments and its fundamental role in nonmonotonic reason, logic programming, and n-person games. Artificial Intelligence 77: 321-357.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dung, P. M., Kowalski, R. and Toni, F. (1996). Synthesis of proof procedures for default reasoning. In Proceedings of the International Workshop on Logic Program Synthesis and Transformation (LOPSTR'96), Springer Verlag Lecture Notes in Computer Science # 1207, 313-324. Springer Verlag.

  • Etherington, D. (1987). Formalizing nonmonotonic reasoning systems. Artificial Intelligence 31: 41-85.

    Google Scholar 

  • Etherington, D. and Reiter, R. (1983). On inheritance hierarchies with exceptions. In Proceedings of the Third National Conference on Artificial Intelligence (AAAI-83), 104-108.

  • Horty, J. (1994). Some direct theories of nonmonotonic inheritance. In Gabbay, D., Hogger, C. and Robinson, J. (eds.), Handbook of Logic in Artificial Intelligence and Logic Programming, Volume 3: Nonmonotonic Reasoning and Uncertain Reasoning, 111-187. Oxford University Press.

  • Horty, J. and Thomason, R. (1988). Mixing strict and defeasible inheritance. In Proceedings of the Seventh National Conference on Artificial Intelligence (AAAI-88), 427-432.

  • Horty, J., Thomason, R. and Touretzky, D. (1990). A skeptical theory of inheritance in nonmonotonic semantic networks. Artificial Intelligence 42: 311-348.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kowalski, R. and Toni, F. (1996). Abstract argumentation. Artificial Intelligence and Law 4: 275-296.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pollock, J. (1987). Defeasible reasoning. Cognitive Science 11: 481-518.

    Google Scholar 

  • Prakken, H. and Sartor, G. (1996). A dialectical model of assessing conflicting arguments in legal reasoning. Artificial Intelligence and Law 4: 331-368.

    Google Scholar 

  • Prakken, H. and Sartor, G. (1996). A system for defeasible argumentation with defeasible priorities. In Proceedings of the International Conference on Formal Aspects of Practical Reasoning, Springer Verlag Lecture Notes in Artificial Intelligence # 1085. Springer Verlag.

  • Prakken, H. and Sartor, G. (1997). Argument-based extended logic programming with defeasible priorities. Journal of Applied Non-classical Logics 7: 25-75.

    Google Scholar 

  • Prakken, H. and Sartor, G. (1998). Modelling reasoning with precedents in a formal dialogue game. Artificial Intelligence and Law 6: 231-287.

    Google Scholar 

  • Prakken, H. and Vreeswijk, G. (forthcoming). Logics for defeasible argumentation. In Gabbay, D. (ed.), Handbook of Philosophical Logic (Second Edition). Kluwer Academic Publishers.

  • Reiter, R. and Criscuolo, G. (1981). On interacting defaults. In Proceedings of the Seventh International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence (IJCAI-81), 270-276.

  • Sloan, A. (1997). Millionaires next door-that is, if your neighbors work for Microsoft. Newsweek, December 8.

  • Touretzky, D., Horty, J. and Thomason, R. (1987). A clash of intuitions: the current state of nonmonotonic multiple inheritance systems. In Proceedings of the Tenth International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence(IJCAI-87), 476-482. Morgan Kaufmann.

  • Touretzky, D., Thomason, R. and Horty, J. (1991). A skeptic's menagerie: conflictors, preemptors, reinstaters, and zombies in nonmonotonic inheritance. In Proceedings of the Twelfth International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence (IJCAI-91), 478-483. Morgan Kaufmann Publishers.

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Philosophy Department and Institute for Advanced Computer Studies, University of Maryland, College Park, MD, 20742, U.S.A.

    John F. Horty

Authors
  1. John F. Horty
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Horty, J.F. Argument construction and reinstatement in logics for defeasible reasoning. Artificial Intelligence and Law 9, 1–28 (2001). https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1011288805074

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1011288805074

Keywords

Search

Navigation