Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Fibring Argumentation Frames

  • Published:
Studia Logica Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

This paper is part of a research program centered around argumentation networks and offering several research directions for argumentation networks, with a view of using such networks for integrating logics and network reasoning.

In Section 1 we introduce our program manifesto. In Section 2 we motivate and show how to substitute one argumentation network as a node in another argumentation network.

Substitution is a purely logical operation and doing it for networks, besides developing their theory further, also helps us see how to bring logic and networks closer together.

Section 3 develops the formal properties of the new kind of network and Section 4 offers general discussion and comparison with the literature.

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

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Barringer, H., D. M. Gabbay, and J. Woods, ‘Temporal dynamics of argumentation networks’, in D. Hutter and W. Stephan (eds.), Mechanising Mathematical Reasoning, LNCS 2605, Springer, 2005, pp. 58–98.

  2. Barringer, H., D. M. Gabbay, and J. Woods, ‘Network modalities’, in G. Gross and K. Schulz (eds.), Linguistics, Computer Science and Language Processing: Festschrift for Franz Guenthner on the Occasion of His 60th Birthday, College Publications, 2008, pp. 79–102.

  3. Boella G., Gabbay D.M., van der Torre L., Villata S.: ‘Metaargumentation part 1’. Studia Logica 93(2-3), 297–355 (2009) this issue

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Boella, G., D. M. Gabbay, L. van der Torre, and S. Villata, ‘An argumentation based approach to coalition formation using voluntary attacks’, In preparation.

  5. Caminada M., Gabbay D.M.: ‘A logical account of formal argumentation’. Studia Logica 93(2-3), 109–145 (2009) this issue

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Carnielli, W., M. Coniglio, D. M. Gabbay, P. Gouveia, and C. Sernadas, Analysis and Synthesis of Logics, 500 pp., Springer, 2007.

  7. Dung P.M.: ‘On the acceptability of arguments and its fundamental role in nonmonotonic reasoning, logic programming and n-person games’. Artificial Intelligence 77, 321–357 (1995)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Engesser, K., D. M. Gabbay, and D. Lehmann, A New Approach to Quantum Logic, 300 pp., College Publications, 2008.

  9. Gabbay, D. M., Labelled Deduction Systems, Oxford University Press, 1996.

  10. Gabbay, D. M., Logic for AI and Information Technology, 500 pp., College Publications, October 2007.

  11. Gabbay, D. M., ‘Reactive Kripke models and contrary to duty norms’, in R. van der Meyden and L. van der Torre (eds.), Proceedings of DEON 2008, Deontic Logic in Computer Science, LNAI 5076, Springer, 2008, pp. 155–173.

  12. Gabbay D.M.: ‘Modal provability foundations for argumentation networks’. Studia Logica 93(2-3), 181–198 (2009) this issue

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Gabbay D.M.: ‘Semantics for higher level attacks in extended argumentation frames, Part 1: Overview’. Studia Logica 93(2-3), 357–381 (2009) this issue

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Gabbay, D. M., The Leverhulme Lectures in Logic, 200 pp. Draft available.

  15. Gabbay D.M., Garcez A.: ‘Logical modes of attack in argumentation networks’. Studia Logica 93(2-3), 199–230 (2009) this issue

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Gabbay, D. M., R. Schmidt and A. Szałas, Second-Order quantifier Elimination, 400 pp., College Publications, 2008.

  17. Gabbay D.M., Szałas A.: ‘Second-order Quantifier Elimination in higherorder contexts with applications to the semantical analysis of conditionals’. Studia Logica 87, 37–50 (2007)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Gabbay D.M., Szałas A.: ‘Annotation theories over finite graphs’. Studia Logica 93(2-3), 147–180 (2009) this issue

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Nielsen, S. H., and S. Parsons, ‘Computing preferred extensions for argumentation systems with sets of attacking arguments’, in Proceedings of the 2006 Conference on Computational Models of Arugment: Proceedings of COMMA 2007, 2006, pp. 97–108.

  20. Nielsen, S. H., and S. Parsons, A Generalization of Dung’s Abstract Framework for Argumentation: Arguing with Sets of Attacking Arguments, LNCS Vol. 4766, Springer, 2007, pp. 54–73.

  21. Wu Y., Caminada M., Gabbay D.: ‘Complete extensions in argumentation coincide with 3-valued stable models in logic programming’. Studia Logica 93(2-3), 383–403 (2009) this issue

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. King’s College, London, UK

    Dov M. Gabbay

Authors
  1. Dov M. Gabbay
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Dov M. Gabbay.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Gabbay, D.M. Fibring Argumentation Frames. Stud Logica 93, 231 (2009). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11225-009-9217-y

Download citation

  • Published:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11225-009-9217-y

Keywords

Search

Navigation