Skip to main content
Article thumbnail
Location of Repository

Moving between Argumentation Frameworks

By Nir Oren, Michael Luck and Chris Reed

Abstract

Postprin

Topics: Argumentation, Abstract Argument Frameworks, Semantics, QA76 Computer software, QA76
Publisher: IOS Press
Year: 2010
DOI identifier: 10.3233/978-1-60750-619-5-379
OAI identifier: oai:aura.abdn.ac.uk:2164/2150
Journal:

Suggested articles

Citations

  1. (2006). A generalization of Dung’s abstract framework for argumentation: Arguing with sets of attacking arguments. doi
  2. (2006). AgeneralizationofDung’sabstractframeworkforargumentation:Arguing with sets of attacking arguments.
  3. (2007). An abstract theory of argumentation that accommodates defeasible reasoning about preferences. doi
  4. (2004). Araucaria: Software for argument analysis, diagramming and representation. doi
  5. (2009). Bipolar Abstract Argumentation Systems. doi
  6. (1997). Integrating preference orderings into argument-based reasoning. doi
  7. (2007). Laying the foundations for a world wide argument web. doi
  8. (1995). On the acceptability of arguments and its fundamental role in nonmonotonic reasoning, logic programming and n-person games. doi
  9. (2005). On the acceptability of arguments in bipolar argumentation frameworks. doi
  10. (2004). On the bipolarity in argumentation frameworks. doi
  11. (2006). Progressive defeat paths in abstract argumentation frameworks. doi
  12. (2009). Reasoning about preferences in argumentation frameworks. doi
  13. (2008). Semantics for evidence-based argumentation.
  14. (2006). Towards an argument interchange format. doi
  15. (2002). Value based argumentation frameworks. doi

To submit an update or takedown request for this paper, please submit an Update/Correction/Removal Request.