Add to ORKGAn axiomatic modeling approach to multi-issue debates is proposed. A debate is viewed as a decision procedure consisting of two stages: (1) an "argumentation rule" determines what arguments are admissible for each party, given the "raw data", depending on the issue or set of issues under discussion; (2) a "persuasion rule" determines the strength of the admissible arguments and selects the winning party. Persuasion rules are characterized for various alternative specifications of the argumentation rule. These characterizations capture rhetorical effects that we sometimes encounter in real-life multi-issue debates.
Using argumentation to debate and reach conclusions is a particularly human activity relevant to man...
A rhetorical model of the debate centered on the image of a labyrinth is more suitable than the meta...
This article gives an overview of the history of formal argumentation in terms of a distinction betw...
I propose a choice-theoretic approach to debates. Two parties dis-agree over multiple issues. Resolu...
This paper provides a formal model for the burden of persuasion in dialogues, and in particular, in ...
Abstract. Debating agents have often different areas of expertise and conflicting opinions on the su...
International audienceSeveral systems were developed for supporting public persuasion dialogs where ...
This chapter discusses how formal models of argumentation can clarify philosophical problems and iss...
In this work we explore the inclusion of the notion of multiple argument conflicts, those in which t...
Some disagreements seem to be persistent: they are, pretty much, immune to persuasive argumentation....
Proposals for strategies for dialogical argumentation often focus on situations where one of the age...
Abstract. This paper analyzes the phenomenon of a shift of the burden of proof in persuasion dialogu...
Dialogue is fundamental to argumentation, providing a dialectical basis for establishing which argum...
In this paper, we provide a formal framework for modeling the burden of persuasion in legal reasonin...
Page 2 We view a debate as a mechanism by which an uninformed decision maker (the listener) extracts...
Using argumentation to debate and reach conclusions is a particularly human activity relevant to man...
A rhetorical model of the debate centered on the image of a labyrinth is more suitable than the meta...
This article gives an overview of the history of formal argumentation in terms of a distinction betw...
I propose a choice-theoretic approach to debates. Two parties dis-agree over multiple issues. Resolu...
This paper provides a formal model for the burden of persuasion in dialogues, and in particular, in ...
Abstract. Debating agents have often different areas of expertise and conflicting opinions on the su...
International audienceSeveral systems were developed for supporting public persuasion dialogs where ...
This chapter discusses how formal models of argumentation can clarify philosophical problems and iss...
In this work we explore the inclusion of the notion of multiple argument conflicts, those in which t...
Some disagreements seem to be persistent: they are, pretty much, immune to persuasive argumentation....
Proposals for strategies for dialogical argumentation often focus on situations where one of the age...
Abstract. This paper analyzes the phenomenon of a shift of the burden of proof in persuasion dialogu...
Dialogue is fundamental to argumentation, providing a dialectical basis for establishing which argum...
In this paper, we provide a formal framework for modeling the burden of persuasion in legal reasonin...
Page 2 We view a debate as a mechanism by which an uninformed decision maker (the listener) extracts...
Using argumentation to debate and reach conclusions is a particularly human activity relevant to man...
A rhetorical model of the debate centered on the image of a labyrinth is more suitable than the meta...
This article gives an overview of the history of formal argumentation in terms of a distinction betw...