Abstract :
[en] This paper studies methodologically robust options for giving logical contents
to nodes in abstract argumentation networks. It defines a variety of notions of
attack in terms of the logical contents of the nodes in a network. General properties
of logics are refined both in the object level and in the meta level to suit the needs
of the application. The network-based system improves upon some of the attempts
in the literature to define attacks in terms of defeasible proofs, the so-called rule-
based systems. We also provide a number of examples and consider a rigorous case
study, which indicate that our system does not suffer from anomalies. We define
consequence relations based on a notion of defeat, consider rationality postulates,
and prove that one such consequence relation is consistent.
Scopus citations®
without self-citations
9