Skip to main content
Disciplines
Automotive Business IT + Informatics Construction + Real Estate Electrical Engineering + Electronics Energy + Sustainability Insurance + Risk Finance + Banking Management + Leadership Marketing + Sales Mechanical Engineering + Materials
Events
DE
EN
Books
Journals
Topic Page
Marketing
Start single access now
Access for companies
EXTENDED SEARCH
Log in
Top
Published in:
Learning Sparse Overcomplete Word Vectors Without Intermediate Dense Representations Read chapter Read first chapter

2017 | OriginalPaper | Chapter

Balancing Between Cognitive and Semantic Acceptability of Arguments

Authors : Hiroyuki Kido, Keishi Okamoto

Published in: Knowledge Science, Engineering and Management

Publisher: Springer International Publishing

Log in

Activate our intelligent search to find suitable subject content or patents.

search-config
loading …

Abstract

This paper addresses the problem concerning approximating human cognitions and semantic extensions regarding acceptability status of arguments. We introduce three types of logical equilibriums in terms of satisfiability, entailment and semantic equivalence in order to analyse balance of human cognitions and semantic extensions. The generality of our proposal is shown by the existence conditions of equilibrium solutions. The applicability of our proposal is demonstrated by the fact that it detects a flaw of argumentation actually taking place in an online forum and suggests its possible resolution.

Dont have a licence yet? Then find out more about our products and how to get one now:

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

  • über 102.000 Bücher
  • über 537 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

  • Automobil + Motoren
  • Bauwesen + Immobilien
  • Business IT + Informatik
  • Elektrotechnik + Elektronik
  • Energie + Nachhaltigkeit
  • Finance + Banking
  • Management + Führung
  • Marketing + Vertrieb
  • Maschinenbau + Werkstoffe
  • Versicherung + Risiko

Jetzt Wissensvorsprung sichern!

inform now

Springer Professional "Technik"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Technik" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

  • über 67.000 Bücher
  • über 390 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

  • Automobil + Motoren
  • Bauwesen + Immobilien
  • Business IT + Informatik
  • Elektrotechnik + Elektronik
  • Energie + Nachhaltigkeit
  • Maschinenbau + Werkstoffe




 

Jetzt Wissensvorsprung sichern!

inform now

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Wirtschaft" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

  • über 67.000 Bücher
  • über 340 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

  • Bauwesen + Immobilien
  • Business IT + Informatik
  • Finance + Banking
  • Management + Führung
  • Marketing + Vertrieb
  • Versicherung + Risiko




Jetzt Wissensvorsprung sichern!

inform now
previous chapter Improved Knowledge Base Completion by the Path-Augmented TransR Model
next chapter Discovery of Jump Breaks in Joint Volatility for Volume and Price of High-Frequency Trading Data in China
Appendix
Available only for authorised users
Footnotes
1
We recognise that sentences existing in arguments indirectly affect semantic acceptability in the sense that they define relations among arguments.
 
2
The exclusive OR is strictly appropriate. However, we use OR because of their equivalence.
 
3
\(\varepsilon (AF)\models \varSigma _{\downarrow }\) denotes that, for all \(x\in L_{AF}\), if \(x\in \varSigma _{\downarrow }\) then \(\varepsilon (AF)\models x\).
 
4
\(\varSigma _{\downarrow }\Leftrightarrow \varepsilon (AF)\) denotes that \(\varSigma _{\downarrow }\models \varepsilon (AF)\) and \(\varepsilon (AF)\models \varSigma _{\downarrow }\) hold.
 
5
The rightmost graph is not an unsatisfiable core when complete extensions are assumed.
 
Literature
1.
2.
Alchourrón, C.E., Gärdenfors, P., Makinson, D.C.: On the logic of theory change: partial meet contraction and revision functions. J. Symbolic Logic 50(2), 510–530 (1985)MathSciNetCrossRefMATH
3.
Baroni, P., Caminada, M., Giacomin, M.: An introduction to argumentation semantics. Knowl. Eng. Rev. 26, 365–410 (2011)CrossRef
4.
Baroni, P., Giacomin, M.: On principle-based evaluation of extension-based argumentation semantics. Artif. Intell. 171(10–15), 675–700 (2007)MathSciNetCrossRefMATH
5.
Baroni, P., Giacomin, M., Guida, G.: Scc-recursiveness: a general schema for argumentation semantics. Artif. Intell. 168(1–2), 162–210 (2005)MathSciNetCrossRefMATH
6.
Baumann, R., Brewka, G.: Expanding argumentation frameworks: enforcing and monotonicity results. In: Proceedings of the 3rd International Conference on Computational Models of Argument, pp. 75–86 (2010)
7.
Baumann, R., Brewka, G.: AGM meets abstract argumentation: expansion and revision for dung frameworks. In: Proceedings of the 24th International Conference on Artificial Intelligence, pp. 2734–2740 (2015)
8.
Besnard, P., Doutre, S.: Checking the acceptability of a set of arguments. In: Proceedings of the 10th International Workshop on Non-Monotonic Reasoning, pp. 59–64 (2004)
9.
Booth, R., Kaci, S., Rienstra, T., van der Torre, L.: A logical theory about dynamics in abstract argumentation. In: Liu, W., Subrahmanian, V.S., Wijsen, J. (eds.) SUM 2013. LNCS (LNAI), vol. 8078, pp. 148–161. Springer, Heidelberg (2013). doi:10.​1007/​978-3-642-40381-1_​12 CrossRef
10.
Caminada, M.: Semi-stable semantics. In: Proceedings of the 1st International Conference on Computational Models of Argument, pp. 121–130 (2006)
11.
Cayrol, C., de Saint-Cyr, F.D., Lagasquie-Schiex, M.C.: Change in abstract argumentation frameworks: adding an argument. J. Artif. Intell. Res. 38, 49–84 (2010)MathSciNetMATH
12.
Coste-Marquis, S., Devred, C., Marquis, P.: Prudent semantics for argumentation frameworks. In: Proceedings of the 17th International Conference on Tools with Artificial Intelligence, pp. 568–572 (2005)
13.
Dung, P.M.: On the acceptability of arguments and its fundamental role in nonmonotonic reasoning, logic programming, and \(n\)-person games. Artif. Intell. 77, 321–357 (1995)MathSciNetCrossRefMATH
14.
Dung, P.M., Mancarella, P., Toni, F.: A dialectic procedure for sceptical, assumption-based argumentation. In: Proceedings of the 1st International Conference on Computational Models of Argument, pp. 145–156 (2006)
15.
Rienstra, T.: Argumentation in flux: modelling change in the theory of argumentation. Dissertations and theses: Doctoral thesis. University of Luxembourg, Luxembourg, Luxembourg (2014)
16.
Schulz, C., Dumitrache, D.: The ArgTeach web-platform. In: Proceedings of the 6th International Conference on Computational Models of Argument, pp. 475–476 (2016)
17.
van Eemeren, F.H., Grootendorst, R., Henkemans, F.S.: Fundamentals of Argumentation Theory: A Handbook of Historical Backgrounds and Contemporary Developments. Routledge, Abingdon (1996)
18.
Verheij, B.: Two approaches to dialectical argumentation: admissible sets and argumentation stages. In: Proceedings of the 8th Dutch Conference on Artificial Intelligence, pp. 357–368 (1996)
Metadata
Title
Balancing Between Cognitive and Semantic Acceptability of Arguments
Authors
Hiroyuki Kido
Keishi Okamoto
Copyright Year
2017
Book
Knowledge Science, Engineering and Management

Print ISBN: 978-3-319-63557-6

Electronic ISBN: 978-3-319-63558-3

Copyright Year: 2017

DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-63558-3_14

Premium Partner

    Image Credits