Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Research challenges for argumentation

  • Special Issue Paper
  • Published:
Computer Science - Research and Development

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

References

  1. Besnard P, Hunter A (2008) Elements of Argumentation. MIT Press, Cambridge

    Google Scholar 

  2. Bex FJ, van den Braak SW, van Oostendorp H, Prakken H, Verheij B, Vreeswijk G (2007) Sense-making software for crime investigation: how to combine stories and arguments? Law Probabil Risk 6:145–168

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Ches~nevar C, Maguitman A, Loui R (2000) Logical models of argument. ACM Comput Surveys 32(4):337–383

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Ches~nevar CI, Maguitman AG (2004) ArgueNet: An Argument-Based Recommender System for Solving Web Search Queries. In: Yager RR, Sgurev VS (eds) Second IEEE Conference on Intelligent Systems, Varna, Bulgary, June 22–24, 2004

  5. Bench-Capon TJM, Dunne PE (2007) Argumentation in artificial intelligence. Artif Intell 171(10–15):619–641

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  6. Garcia AJ, Rotstein ND, Simari GR (2007) Dialectical Explanations in Defeasible Argumentation. Procs. of the 9th European Conf on Symbolic and Qualitative Aspects of Reasoning with Uncertainty (ECSQARU 2007). LNCS v. 4724, Tunez, pp 295–307

  7. Girle R, Hitchcock D, McBurney P, Verheij B (2004) Decision Support for Practical Reasoning. In: Reed C, Norman T (Eds) Argumentation Machines: New Frontiers in Argument and Computation. Kluwer Academic, Dordrecht, pp 55–84

  8. Hunter A (2001) Hybrid argumentation systems for structured news reports. Knowl Engin Rev 16:295–223

    Google Scholar 

  9. Pollock J (1987) Defeasible reasoning. Cogn Sci 11:481–518

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Pollock J (2006) Against optimality: logical foundations for decision-theoretic planning in autonomous agents. Comput Intell 22(1):1–25

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  11. Prakken H, Vreeswijk G (2002) Logical Systems for Defeasible Argumentation. In: Gabbay D, Guenther F (eds) Handbook of Philosophical Logic, Vol 4. Kluwer Academic Publishers, Dordrecht, pp 219–318

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Dept. of Computer Science, Chair for Computational Intelligence, Niedersächsische Technische Hochschule (NTH), Standort Clausthal, Julius-Albert-Strasse 4, 38678, Clausthal, Germany

    Jürgen Dix

  2. Brooklyn College, Brooklyn, USA

    Simon Parsons

  3. Utrecht University, Utrecht, The Netherlands

    Henry Prakken

  4. University of Groningen, Groningen, The Netherlands

    Henry Prakken

  5. Dept. of Computer Science and Engineering, Universidad Nacional del Sur, Bahia Blanca, Argentina

    Guillermo Simari

Authors
  1. Jürgen Dix
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Simon Parsons
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Henry Prakken
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Guillermo Simari
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Jürgen Dix.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Dix, J., Parsons, S., Prakken, H. et al. Research challenges for argumentation . Comp. Sci. Res. Dev. 23, 27–34 (2009). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00450-009-0051-2

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00450-009-0051-2

Keywords

Search

Navigation