ML Anthology

Revisiting Unrestricted Rebut and Preferences in Structured Argumentation

Jesse Heyninck, Christian Straßer
IJCAI 2017 pp. 1088-1092
doi:10.24963/IJCAI.2017/151 /ijcai/2017/heyninck2017ijcai-revisiting/

Abstract

In structured argumentation frameworks such as ASPIC+, rebuts are only allowed in conclusions produced by defeasible rules. This has been criticized as counter-intuitive especially in dialectical contexts. In this paper we show that ASPIC-, a system allowing for unrestricted rebuts, suffers from contamination problems. We remedy this shortcoming by generalizing the attack rule of unrestricted rebut. Our resulting system satisfies the usual rationality postulates for prioritized rule bases.

PDF IJCAI Semantic Scholar

Cite

Text

Heyninck and Straßer. "Revisiting Unrestricted Rebut and Preferences in Structured Argumentation." International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence, 2017. doi:10.24963/IJCAI.2017/151

Markdown

[Heyninck and Straßer. "Revisiting Unrestricted Rebut and Preferences in Structured Argumentation." International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence, 2017.](https://mlanthology.org/ijcai/2017/heyninck2017ijcai-revisiting/) doi:10.24963/IJCAI.2017/151

BibTeX

@inproceedings{heyninck2017ijcai-revisiting,
  title     = {{Revisiting Unrestricted Rebut and Preferences in Structured Argumentation}},
  author    = {Heyninck, Jesse and Straßer, Christian},
  booktitle = {International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence},
  year      = {2017},
  pages     = {1088-1092},
  doi       = {10.24963/IJCAI.2017/151},
  url       = {https://mlanthology.org/ijcai/2017/heyninck2017ijcai-revisiting/}
}