Beyond admissibility: accepting cycles in argumentation with game protocols for cogency criteria

Fil: Bodanza, Gustavo Adrian. Universidad Nacional del Sur. Departamento de Humanidades; Argentina. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Cientificas y Tecnicas. Centro Cientifico Tecnologico Conicet - Bahia Blanca. Instituto de Investigaciones Economicas y Sociales del Sur. Universidad Nacional del Sur. Departamento de Economia. Instituto de Investigaciones Economicas y Sociales del Sur; Argentina

[1]  Fernando A. Tohmé,et al.  Two approaches to the problems of self-attacking arguments and general odd-length cycles of attack , 2009, J. Appl. Log..

[2]  Bernhard Nebel,et al.  On the computational complexity of assumption-based argumentation for default reasoning , 2002, Artif. Intell..

[3]  Claudette Cayrol,et al.  On Decision Problems Related to the Preferred Semantics for Argumentation Frameworks , 2003, J. Log. Comput..

[4]  David Gale,et al.  13. Infinite Games with Perfect Information , 1953 .

[5]  Pietro Baroni,et al.  On principle-based evaluation of extension-based argumentation semantics , 2007, Artif. Intell..

[6]  Pietro Baroni,et al.  SCC-recursiveness: a general schema for argumentation semantics , 2005, Artif. Intell..

[7]  Claudette Cayrol,et al.  A Reasoning Model Based on the Production of Acceptable Arguments , 2002, Annals of Mathematics and Artificial Intelligence.

[8]  H. Herzberger,et al.  Ordinal Preference and Rational Choice , 1973 .

[9]  Y. Moschovakis.  Descriptive Set Theory , 1980 .

[10]  Sanjay Modgil,et al.  Proof Theories and Algorithms for Abstract Argumentation Frameworks , 2009, Argumentation in Artificial Intelligence.

[11]  Ricardo Caferra.  A Tableaux Method for Systematic Simultaneous Search for Refutationas and Models Using Equational Problems , 1993, J. Log. Comput..

[12]  Trevor J. M. Bench-Capon,et al.  Two party immediate response disputes: Properties and efficiency , 2003, Artif. Intell..

[13]  Paolo Mancarella,et al.  Computing ideal sceptical argumentation , 2007, Artif. Intell..

[14]  Ariel Rubinstein,et al.  A Course in Game Theory , 1995 .

[15]  Bart Verheij,et al.  Two Approaches to Dialectical Argumentation: Admissible Sets and Argumentation Stages , 1999 .

[16]  John L. Pollock,et al.  Self-defeating arguments , 1991, Minds and Machines.

[17]  Guillermo Ricardo Simari,et al.  The foundations of DeLP: defeating relations, games and truth values , 2009, Annals of Mathematics and Artificial Intelligence.

[18]  Martin Caminada,et al.  On the Issue of Reinstatement in Argumentation , 2006, JELIA.

[19]  Guillermo Ricardo Simari,et al.  Argumentation Games for Admissibility and Cogency Criteria , 2012, COMMA.

[20]  Marcelo E. Coniglio,et al.  The Many Sides of Logic , 2009 .

[21]  Dirk Vermeir,et al.  Dialectic semantics for argumentation frameworks , 1999, ICAIL '99.

[22]  Iyad Rahwan,et al.  Behavioral Experiments for Assessing the Abstract Argumentation Semantics of Reinstatement , 2010, Cogn. Sci..

[23]  Phan Minh Dung,et al.  Towards a Common Framework for Dialectical Proof Procedures in Abstract Argumentation , 2009, J. Log. Comput..

[24]  Gerard Vreeswijk,et al.  Defeasible Dialectics: A Controversy-Oriented Approach Towards Defeasible Argumentation , 1993, J. Log. Comput..

[25]  Gerard Vreeswijk.  An algorithm to compute minimally grounded and admissible defence sets in argument systems , 2006, COMMA.

[26]  Phan Minh Dung,et al.  On the Acceptability of Arguments and its Fundamental Role in Nonmonotonic Reasoning, Logic Programming and n-Person Games , 1995, Artif. Intell..