Graduate studies at Western
|Abstract||Dialectic is the fancy word for debate. AI contributes to the logic and processing of argument and uses ideas of argument in its models of communication; as it continues to do this, the computational study of dialectic, like the computational study of argument, is inevitable.|
|Keywords||No keywords specified (fix it)|
No categories specified
(categorize this paper)
|Through your library||Only published papers are available at libraries|
Similar books and articles
Gualtiero Piccinini (2006). Computational Explanation in Neuroscience. Synthese 153 (3):343-353.
John Symons (2008). Computational Models of Emergent Properties. Minds and Machines 18 (4):475-491.
Rick Grush (2001). The Semantic Challenge to Computational Neuroscience. In Peter K. Machamer, Peter McLaughlin & Rick Grush (eds.), Theory and Method in the Neurosciences. University of Pittsburgh Press.
David Michael Kaplan (2011). Explanation and Description in Computational Neuroscience. Synthese 183 (3):339-373.
Randall D. Beer (1998). Framing the Debate Between Computational and Dynamical Approaches to Cognitive Science. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 21 (5):630-630.
Michael Rescorla (2013). Against Structuralist Theories of Computational Implementation. British Journal for the Philosophy of Science 64 (4):681-707.
Ron Sun (ed.) (2008). The Cambridge Handbook of Computational Psychology. Cambridge University Press.
David J. Kijowski, Harry Dankowicz & Michael C. Loui (2013). Observations on the Responsible Development and Use of Computational Models and Simulations. Science and Engineering Ethics 19 (1):63-81.
Henry Prakken & John Horty (2012). An Appreciation of John Pollock's Work on the Computational Study of Argument. Argument and Computation 3 (1):1 - 19.
Sorry, there are not enough data points to plot this chart.
Added to index2009-01-28
Recent downloads (6 months)0
How can I increase my downloads?