research-article

Modelling Accrual of Arguments in ASPIC+

Author:

Henry PrakkenAuthors Info & Claims

ICAIL '19: Proceedings of the Seventeenth International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Law

Pages 103 - 112

https://doi.org/10.1145/3322640.3326703

Published: 17 June 2019 Publication History

Abstract

In this paper a new formal model of argument accrual is proposed as an adaptation of the ASPIC+ framework for structured argumentation. The new model aims to overcome several weaknesses of existing proposals. It is shown to have desirable formal properties that are in line with standard work on formal argumentation, and to be applicable to a range of situations in legal reasoning.

References

[1]

L. Al-Abdulkarim, K.D. Atkinson, and T.J.M. Bench-Capon. A methodology for desinging to reason with legal cases using abstract dialectical frameworks. Artificial Intelligence and Law, 24:1--50, 2016.

Digital Library

[2]

V. Aleven. Using background knowledge in case-based legal reasoning: a computational model and an intelligent learning environment. Artificial Intelligence, 150:183--237, 2003.

Digital Library

[3]

T.J. Anderson and W. Twining. Analysis of Evidence. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, second edition, 2005.

[4]

P. Baroni, M. Caminada, and M. Giacomin. An introduction to argumentation semantics. The Knowledge Engineering Review, 26:365--410, 2011.

Digital Library

[5]

G. Brewka and S. Woltran. Abstract dialectical frameworks. In Principles of Knowledge Representation and Reasoning: Proceedings of the Twelfth International Conference, pages 102--111. AAAI Press, 2010.

Digital Library

[6]

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

Digital Library

[7]

R.M. Dworkin. Is law a system of rules? In R.M. Dworkin, editor, The Philosophy of Law, pages 38--65. Oxford University Press, Oxford, 1977.

[8]

T.F. Gordon. Defining argument weighing functions. Journal of Applied Logics -- IfCoLog Journal of Logics and their Application, 5:747--773, 2018.

[9]

T.F. Gordon, H. Prakken, and D.N. Walton. The Carneades model of argument and burden of proof. Artificial Intelligence, 171:875--896, 2007.

Digital Library

[10]

T.F. Gordon and D.N. Walton. Formalizing balancing arguments. In P. Baroni, T.F. Gordon, T. Scheffler, and M. Stede, editors, Computational Models of Argument. Proceedings of COMMA 2016, pages 327--338. IOS Press, Amsterdam etc, 2016.

[11]

S. Modgil and H. Prakken. A general account of argumentation with preferences. Artificial Intelligence, 195:361--397, 2013.

Digital Library

[12]

S. Modgil and H. Prakken. The ASPIC+ framework for structured argumentation: a tutorial. Argument and Computation, 5:31--62, 2014.

[13]

S. Modgil and H. Prakken. Abstract rule-based argumentation. In P. Baroni, D. Gabbay, M. Giacomin, and L. van der Torre, editors, Handbook of Formal Argumentation, volume 1, pages 73--141. College Publications, London, 2018.

[14]

J.L. Pollock. Cognitive Carpentry. A Blueprint for How to Build a Person. MIT Press, Cambridge, MA, 1995.

Digital Library

[15]

H. Prakken. A study of accrual of arguments, with applications to evidential reasoning. In Proceedings of the Tenth International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Law, pages 85--94, New York, 2005. ACM Press.

Digital Library

[16]

H. Prakken. Relating ways to instantiate abstract argumentation frameworks. In K.D. Atkinson, H. Prakken, and A.Z. Wyner, editors, From Knowledge Representation to Argumentation in AI, Law and Policy Making. A Festschrift in Honour of Trevor Bench-Capon on the Occasion of his 60th Birthday, pages 167--189. College Publications, London, 2013.

[17]

H. Prakken. Formalising debates about lawmaking proposals as practical reasoning. In M. Araszkiewicz and K. Płteszka, editors, Logic in the Theory and Practice of Lawmaking, pages 301--321. Springer, Berlin, 2015.

[18]

J. Raz. Practical Reason and Norms. Princeton University Press, Princeton, 1975.

[19]

B. Verheij. Rules, reasons, arguments: formal studies of argumentation and defeat. Doctoral dissertation University of Maastricht, 1996.

[20]

B. Verheij, J.C. Hage, and H.J. van der Herik. An integrated view on rules and principles. Artificial Intelligence and Law, 6:3--26, 1998.

Digital Library

[21]

D.N. Walton and T.F. Gordon. Cumulative arguments in artificial intelligence and informal logic. Revista Iberoamericana de Argumentacion, 14:1--28, 2017.

[22]

Bin Wei and H. Prakken. Defining the structure of arguments with AI models of argumentation. In F. Bex, F. Grasso, N. Green, F. Paglieri, and C. Reed, editors, Argument Technologies: Theory, Analysis, and Applications, pages 1--22. College Publications, London, 2017.

Cited By

Ruiz-Dolz RHeras SGarcía-Fornes A(2025)An introduction to computational argumentation research from a human argumentation perspectiveAutonomous Agents and Multi-Agent Systems10.1007/s10458-025-09692-x39:1Online publication date: 13-Feb-2025
https://doi.org/10.1007/s10458-025-09692-x
Sartor G(2023)Interpretation, Argumentation, and the Determinacy of LawRatio Juris10.1111/raju.1238936:3(214-241)Online publication date: 14-Jul-2023
https://doi.org/10.1111/raju.12389
Governatori GBench-Capon TVerheij BAraszkiewicz MFrancesconi EGrabmair M(2022)Thirty years of Artificial Intelligence and Law: the first decadeArtificial Intelligence and Law10.1007/s10506-022-09329-430:4(481-519)Online publication date: 6-Sep-2022
https://doi.org/10.1007/s10506-022-09329-4
Show More Cited By

Index Terms

Modelling Accrual of Arguments in ASPIC+
1. Computing methodologies
  1. Artificial intelligence
    1. Knowledge representation and reasoning
      1. Nonmonotonic, default reasoning and belief revision

Recommendations

Formalization of argument accrual: Acceptability semantics and dialectical proof procedure

Argumentation is a powerful paradigm able to formalize commonsense reasoning, finding application in different domains such as automated reasoning, decision making, legal dispute, automated negotiation, etc. However, most of these argumentation-based ...
Modelling argument accrual with possibilistic uncertainty in a logic programming setting

Argumentation frameworks have proven to be a successful approach to formalizing commonsense reasoning. Recently, some argumentation frameworks have emerged which incorporate the treatment of possibilistic uncertainty, notably Possibilistic Defeasible ...
Reconstructing Popov v. Hayashi in a framework for argumentation with structured arguments and Dungean semantics

In this article the argumentation structure of the court's decision in the Popov v. Hayashi case is formalised in Prakken's (Argument Comput 1:93---124; 2010 ) abstract framework for argument-based inference with structured arguments. In this framework, ...

Comments

Information & Contributors

Information

Published In

cover image ACM Conferences

ICAIL '19: Proceedings of the Seventeenth International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Law

June 2019

312 pages

ISBN:9781450367547

DOI:10.1145/3322640

Copyright © 2019 ACM.

Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for components of this work owned by others than ACM must be honored. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee. Request permissions from [email protected]

Sponsors

SIGAI: ACM Special Interest Group on Artificial Intelligence

In-Cooperation

Univ. of Montreal: University of Montreal
AAAI
IAAIL: Intl Asso for Artifical Intel & Law

Publisher

Association for Computing Machinery

New York, NY, United States

Publication History

Published: 17 June 2019

Permissions

Request permissions for this article.

Request Permissions

Check for updates

Author Tags

Qualifiers

Research-article
Research
Refereed limited

Conference

ICAIL '19

Sponsor:

SIGAI

ICAIL '19: Seventeenth International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Law

June 17 - 21, 2019

QC, Montreal, Canada

Acceptance Rates

Overall Acceptance Rate 69 of 169 submissions, 41%

Contributors

Other Metrics

View Article Metrics

Bibliometrics & Citations

Bibliometrics

Article Metrics

8
Total Citations
View Citations
122
Total Downloads

Downloads (Last 12 months)16
Downloads (Last 6 weeks)0

Reflects downloads up to 08 Mar 2025

Other Metrics

View Author Metrics

Citations

Cited By

Ruiz-Dolz RHeras SGarcía-Fornes A(2025)An introduction to computational argumentation research from a human argumentation perspectiveAutonomous Agents and Multi-Agent Systems10.1007/s10458-025-09692-x39:1Online publication date: 13-Feb-2025
https://doi.org/10.1007/s10458-025-09692-x
Sartor G(2023)Interpretation, Argumentation, and the Determinacy of LawRatio Juris10.1111/raju.1238936:3(214-241)Online publication date: 14-Jul-2023
https://doi.org/10.1111/raju.12389
Governatori GBench-Capon TVerheij BAraszkiewicz MFrancesconi EGrabmair M(2022)Thirty years of Artificial Intelligence and Law: the first decadeArtificial Intelligence and Law10.1007/s10506-022-09329-430:4(481-519)Online publication date: 6-Sep-2022
https://doi.org/10.1007/s10506-022-09329-4
Sassoon IKökciyan NModgil SParsons S(2021)Argumentation schemes for clinical decision supportArgument & Computation10.3233/AAC-20055012:3(329-355)Online publication date: 13-Aug-2021
https://doi.org/10.3233/AAC-200550
Bench-Capon TAtkinson KMaranhão JWyner A(2021)Precedential constraintProceedings of the Eighteenth International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Law10.1145/3462757.3466062(12-21)Online publication date: 21-Jun-2021
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3462757.3466062
Yun BVesic S(2021)Gradual Semantics for Weighted Bipolar SETAFsSymbolic and Quantitative Approaches to Reasoning with Uncertainty10.1007/978-3-030-86772-0_15(201-214)Online publication date: 19-Sep-2021
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-86772-0_15
Rossit JMailly JDimopoulos YMoraitis P(2020)United we stand: Accruals in strength-based argumentationArgument & Computation10.3233/AAC-20090412:1(87-113)Online publication date: 17-Jul-2020
https://doi.org/10.3233/AAC-200904
Atkinson KBench-Capon TBex FGordon TPrakken HSartor GVerheij B(2020)In memoriam Douglas N. Walton: the influence of Doug Walton on AI and lawArtificial Intelligence and Law10.1007/s10506-020-09272-2Online publication date: 16-Jun-2020
https://doi.org/10.1007/s10506-020-09272-2

View Options

Login options

Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.

Full Access

Get this Publication

View options

PDF

View or Download as a PDF file.

eReader

View online with eReader.

Figures

Tables

Media

View Table of Conten