Assessing the epistemological relevance of Dung-style argumentation theories
From MaRDI portal
Publication:524939
DOI10.1007/s10472-015-9484-4zbMath1380.03011OpenAlexW2216527696MaRDI QIDQ524939
Publication date: 27 April 2017
Published in: Annals of Mathematics and Artificial Intelligence (Search for Journal in Brave)
Full work available at URL: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10472-015-9484-4
Related Items (1)
Uses Software
Cites Work
- Unnamed Item
- Unnamed Item
- A general account of argumentation with preferences
- A brief comparison of Pollock's defeasible reasoning and ranking functions
- On the evaluation of argumentation formalisms
- Argumentation in artificial intelligence
- On the merging of Dung's argumentation systems
- The carneades model of argument and burden of proof
- A logic for default reasoning
- An abstract, argumentation-theoretic approach to default reasoning
- A reasoning model based on the production of acceptable arguments
- On the acceptability of arguments and its fundamental role in nonmonotonic reasoning, logic programming and \(n\)-person games
- Inferring from inconsistency in preference-based argumentation frameworks
- A textbook of belief dynamics. Theory change and database updating
- Abstract argumentation and explanation applied to scientific debates
- On inference from inconsistent premisses
- Change in Abstract Argumentation Frameworks: Adding an Argument
- On the logic of theory change: Partial meet contraction and revision functions
- Symbolic and Quantitative Approaches to Reasoning with Uncertainty
This page was built for publication: Assessing the epistemological relevance of Dung-style argumentation theories
