References of "Kampik, Timotheus"
     in
Bookmark and Share    
Full Text
Peer Reviewed
See detailThe Burden of Persuasion in Abstract Argumentation
Kampik, Timotheus; Gabbay, Dov M. UL; Sartor, Giovanni

in Baroni, Pietro; Benzmüller, Christoph; Wang, Yiqun (Eds.) Logic and Argumentation - 4th International Conference, CLAR 2021 Hangzhou, China, October 20-22, 2021, Proceedings (2021)

In this paper, we provide a formal framework for modeling the burden of persuasion in legal reasoning. The framework is based on abstract argumentation, a frequently studied method of non-monotonic ... [more ▼]

In this paper, we provide a formal framework for modeling the burden of persuasion in legal reasoning. The framework is based on abstract argumentation, a frequently studied method of non-monotonic reasoning, and can be applied to different argumentation semantics; it supports burdens of persuasion with arbitrary many levels, and allows for the placement of a burden of persuasion on any subset of an argumentation framework’s arguments. Our framework can be considered an extension of related works that raise questions on how burdens of persuasion should be handled in some conflict scenarios that can be modeled with abstract argumentation. An open source software implementation of the introduced formal notions is available as an extension of an argumentation reasoning library. [less ▲]

Detailed reference viewed: 33 (2 UL)
Full Text
Peer Reviewed
See detailExplainable Reasoning in Face of Contradictions: From Humans to Machines
Kampik, Timotheus; Gabbay, Dov M. UL

in Calvaresi, Davide; Najjar, Amro; Winikoff, Michael (Eds.) et al Explainable and Transparent AI and Multi-Agent Systems - Third International Workshop, EXTRAAMAS 2021, Virtual Event, May 3-7, 2021, Revised Selected Papers (2021)

A well-studied trait of human reasoning and decision-making is the ability to not only make decisions in the presence of contradictions, but also to explain why a decision was made, in particular if a ... [more ▼]

A well-studied trait of human reasoning and decision-making is the ability to not only make decisions in the presence of contradictions, but also to explain why a decision was made, in particular if a decision deviates from what is expected by an inquirer who requests the explanation. In this paper, we examine this phenomenon, which has been extensively explored by behavioral economics research, from the perspective of symbolic artificial intelligence. In particular, we introduce four levels of intelligent reasoning in face of contradictions, which we motivate from a microeconomics and behavioral economics perspective. We relate these principles to symbolic reasoning approaches, using abstract argumentation as an exemplary method. This allows us to ground the four levels in a body of related previous and ongoing research, which we use as a point of departure for outlining future research directions. [less ▲]

Detailed reference viewed: 23 (0 UL)
Full Text
Peer Reviewed
See detailThe Degrees of Monotony-Dilemma in Abstract Argumentation
Kampik, Timotheus; Gabbay, Dov M. UL

in Vejnarová, Jirina; Wilson, Nic (Eds.) Symbolic and Quantitative Approaches to Reasoning with Uncertainty - 16th European Conference, ECSQARU 2021, Prague, Czech Republic September 21-24, 2021, Proceedings (2021)

In this paper, we introduce the notion of the degree of monotony to abstract argumentation, a well-established method for drawing inferences in face of conflicts in non-monotonic reasoning. Roughly ... [more ▼]

In this paper, we introduce the notion of the degree of monotony to abstract argumentation, a well-established method for drawing inferences in face of conflicts in non-monotonic reasoning. Roughly speaking, the degree of monotony allows us, given an abstract argumentation semantics and an abstract argumentation framework to be as monotonic as possible, when iteratively drawing inferences and expanding the argumentation framework. However, we also show that when expanding an argumentation framework several times using so-called normal expansions, an agent may, at any given step, select a conclusion that has the highest degree of monotony w.r.t. the previous conclusion (considering the constraints of the semantics), but end up with a conclusion that has a suboptimal degree of monotony w.r.t. one or several conclusions that precede the previous conclusion. We formalize this observation as the degrees of monotony-dilemma. [less ▲]

Detailed reference viewed: 26 (0 UL)
Full Text
Peer Reviewed
See detailA Brief Introduction to the Shkop Approach to Conflict Resolution in Formal Argumentation
Gabbay, Dov M. UL; Kampik, Timotheus

in Liao, Beishui; Jieting, Luo; van der Torre, Leon (Eds.) Logics for New-Generation AI 2021 (2021)

In this paper, we formalise the Shkop approach to conflict resolution in formal argumentation, in which we start with an empty abstract argumentation framework AF and an initially empty set of inferred ... [more ▼]

In this paper, we formalise the Shkop approach to conflict resolution in formal argumentation, in which we start with an empty abstract argumentation framework AF and an initially empty set of inferred arguments. Then, we expand AF one argument at a time, and evaluate after each expansion if i) arguments that have previously been inferred can be kept (or have to be discarded due to sufficient doubt) and ii) if the newly added argument can be added to the set of inferred arguments. Based on this idea, we introduce a novel approach for designing abstract argumentation semantics. As a particular semantics, we define grounded Shkop semantics – a naive set-based argumentation semantics that does not inhibit a well-known problem of CF2 semantics. [less ▲]

Detailed reference viewed: 21 (0 UL)
Full Text
Peer Reviewed
See detailEthical Concerns and Opportunities in Binding Intelligent Systems and Blockchain Technology
Calvaresi, Davide; Piguet, Jean-Gabriel; Calbimonte, Jean-Paul et al

in Highlights in Practical Applications of Agents, Multi-Agent Systems and Trust-worthiness. The PAAMS Collection - International Workshops of PAAMS 2020, L'Aquila, Italy, October 7-9, 2020, Proceedings (2020)

Detailed reference viewed: 114 (4 UL)