Hybrid Reasoning with Argumentation Schemes

Practical reasoning typically requires a variety of argumentation schemes to be used together to solve problems and make decisions. For example, a legal case may raise issues requiring argument from precedent cases, rules, policy goals, moral principles, jurisprudential doctrine, social values and evidence. This tutorial presents an introduction to the modern philosophy of argumentation and argumentation technology, including an extensible software architecture which allows diverse computational models of argumentation schemes to be used together in an integrated way to construct and search for arguments. The architecture has been implemented in Carneades, a software library for building argumentation tools. The architecture is illustrated with models of schemes for argument from ontologies, rules, cases and testimonial evidence and compared to blackboard systems for hybrid reasoning.

[1]  Jon Doyle,et al.  A Truth Maintenance System , 1979, Artif. Intell..

[2]  John L. Pollock,et al.  Defeasible Reasoning , 2020, Synthese Library.

[3]  Phan Minh Dung,et al.  An Abstract, Argumentation-Theoretic Approach to Default Reasoning , 1997, Artif. Intell..

[4]  Michael J. Maher,et al.  Argumentation Semantics for Defeasible Logic , 2004, J. Log. Comput..

[5]  Henry Prakken,et al.  The Carneades model of argument and burden of proof , 2007, Artif. Intell..

[6]  Vincent A. W. M. M. Aleven,et al.  Teaching case-based argumentation through a model and examples , 1997 .

[7]  Trevor J. M. Bench-Capon,et al.  Argument Schemes for Legal Case-based Reasoning , 2007, JURIX.

[8]  L. Karl Branting,et al.  Reasoning with Rules and Precedents: A Computational Model Of Legal Analysis , 1999 .

[9]  Deborah L. McGuinness,et al.  OWL Web ontology language overview , 2004 .

[10]  Bart Verheij,et al.  Dialectical Argumentation with Argumentation Schemes: An Approach to Legal Logic , 2003, Artificial Intelligence and Law.

[11]  J. Hage.  Reasoning with Rules: An Essay on Legal Reasoning and Its Underlying Logic , 1996 .

[12]  Henry Prakken,et al.  A dialectical model of assessing conflicting arguments in legal reasoning , 1996, Artificial Intelligence and Law.

[13]  Ian Horrocks,et al.  Description logic programs: combining logic programs with description logic , 2003, WWW '03.

[14]  Jim D. Mackenzie,et al.  Question-begging in non-cumulative systems , 1979, J. Philos. Log..

[15]  James A. Hendler,et al.  The Semantic Web" in Scientific American , 2001 .

[16]  Iyad Rahwan,et al.  Arguments in OWL: A Progress Report , 2008, COMMA.

[17]  Chris Reed,et al.  Araucaria: Software for Argument Analysis, Diagramming and Representation , 2004, Int. J. Artif. Intell. Tools.

[18]  Victor R. Lesser,et al.  The Hearsay-II Speech-Understanding System: Integrating Knowledge to Resolve Uncertainty , 1980, CSUR.

[19]  H. B. Verheij.  Rules, reasons, arguments : formal studies of argumentation and defeat , 1996 .

[20]  Johan de Kleer,et al.  An Assumption-Based TMS , 1987, Artif. Intell..

[21]  Edwina L. Rissland,et al.  Arguments and cases: An inevitable intertwining , 1992, Artificial Intelligence and Law.

[22]  Douglas Walton,et al.  Legal argumentation and evidence , 2002 .

[23]  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..

[24]  Henry Prakken,et al.  Modelling Reasoning with Precedents in a Formal Dialogue Game , 1998 .

[25]  Kevin D. Ashley.  Modeling legal argument - reasoning with cases and hypotheticals , 1991, Artificial intelligence and legal reasoning.

[26]  Guillermo Ricardo Simari,et al.  A Mathematical Treatment of Defeasible Reasoning and its Implementation , 1992, Artif. Intell..

[27]  T. Gordon.  The Pleadings Game , 1993, ICAIL '93.

[28]  Diego Calvanese,et al.  The Description Logic Handbook: Theory, Implementation, and Applications , 2003, Description Logic Handbook.

[29]  Douglas Walton,et al.  Fundamentals of critical argumentation , 2006, Critical reasoning and argumentation.

[30]  Donald Nute,et al.  Defeasible Logic , 1994, INAP.