Generalized abstract argumentation: Handling arguments in FOL fragments
Generalized argumentation frameworks relate formulae in classical logic to arguments based on the Dung's classic framework. The main purpose of the generalization is to provide a theory capable of reasoning (following argumentation technics) about inconsistent knowledge bases (KB) expressed in...
| Autores: | , , , |
|---|---|
| Tipo de recurso: | artículo |
| Estado: | Versión publicada |
| Fecha de publicación: | 2009 |
| País: | Argentina |
| Institución: | Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas |
| Repositorio: | CONICET Digital (CONICET) |
| Idioma: | inglés |
| OAI Identifier: | oai:ri.conicet.gov.ar:11336/71098 |
| Acceso en línea: | http://hdl.handle.net/11336/71098 |
| Access Level: | acceso abierto |
| Palabra clave: | Reasoning Over Inconsistency First-Order Logic Argumentation https://purl.org/becyt/ford/1.2 https://purl.org/becyt/ford/1 |
| Sumario: | Generalized argumentation frameworks relate formulae in classical logic to arguments based on the Dung's classic framework. The main purpose of the generalization is to provide a theory capable of reasoning (following argumentation technics) about inconsistent knowledge bases (KB) expressed in FOL fragments. Consequently, the notion of argument is related to a single formula in the KB. This allows to share the same primitive elements from both, the framework (arguments) and, the KB (formulae). A framework with such features would not only allow to manage a wide range of knowledge representation languages, but also to cope with the dynamics of knowledge in a straightforward manner. © 2009 Springer Berlin Heidelberg. |
|---|