5 found
Sort by:
  1. Pietro Baroni, Marco Romano, Francesca Toni, Marco Aurisicchio & Giorgio Bertanza (2015). Automatic Evaluation of Design Alternatives with Quantitative Argumentation. Argument and Computation 6 (1):24-49.
    This paper presents a novel argumentation framework to support Issue-Based Information System style debates on design alternatives, by providing an automatic quantitative evaluation of the positions put forward. It also identifies several formal properties of the proposed quantitative argumentation framework and compares it with existing non-numerical abstract argumentation formalisms. Finally, the paper describes the integration of the proposed approach within the design Visual Understanding Environment software tool along with three case studies in engineering design. The case studies show the potential (...)
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  2. Philippe Besnard, Alejandro Garcia, Anthony Hunter, Sanjay Modgil, Henry Prakken, Guillermo Simari & Francesca Toni (2014). Introduction to Structured Argumentation. Argument and Computation 5 (1):1-4.
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  3. Francesca Toni (2014). A Tutorial on Assumption-Based Argumentation. Argument and Computation 5 (1):89-117.
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  4. Francesca Toni (2008). Assumption-Based Argumentation for Closed and Consistent Defeasible Reasoning. In Satoh (ed.), New Frontiers in Artificial Intelligence. Springer. 390--402.
    No categories
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  5. Robert A. Kowalski & Francesca Toni (1996). Abstract Argumentation. Artificial Intelligence and Law 4 (3-4):275-296.
    In this paper we explore the thesis that the role of argumentation in practical reasoning in general and legal reasoning in particular is to justify the use of defeasible rules to derive a conclusion in preference to the use of other defeasible rules to derive a conflicting conclusion. The defeasibility of rules is expressed by means of non-provability claims as additional conditions of the rules.We outline an abstract approach to defeasible reasoning and argumentation which includes many existing formalisms, including default (...)
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation