On the correspondence between abstract dialectical frameworks and nonmonotonic conditional logics

The exact relationship between formal argumentation and nonmonotonic logics is a research topic that keeps on eluding researchers despite recent intensified efforts. We contribute to a deeper understanding of this relation by investigating characterizations of abstract dialectical frameworks in conditional logics for nonmonotonic reasoning. We first show that in general, there is a gap between argumentation and conditional semantics when applying several intuitive translations, but then prove that this gap can be closed when focusing on specific classes of translations

A Conditional Logic-Based Argumentation Framework

The goal of this paper is twofold. First, a logic-based argumentation framework is introduced in the context of conditional logic, as conditional logic is often regarded as an appealing setting for knowledge representation and reasoning. Second, a concept of conditional contrariety is defined that covers usual inconsistency-based conflicts and puts in light a specific form of conflicts that often occurs in real-life: when an agent asserts an If then rule, it can be argued that additional conditions are actually needed to derive the conclusion

A Conditional Logic-Based Argumentation Framework

The goal of this paper is twofold. First, a logic-based argumentation framework is introduced in the context of conditional logic, as conditional logic is often regarded as an appealing setting for knowledge representation and reasoning. Second, a concept of conditional contrariety is defined that covers usual inconsistency-based conflicts and puts in light a specific form of conflicts that often occurs in real-life: when an agent asserts an If then rule, it can be argued that additional conditions are actually needed to derive the conclusion

A Conditional Logic-Based Argumentation Framework

International audienc