Log in

Relevant bibliographies by topics / Defeasible logic / Journal articles

Journal articles on the topic 'Defeasible logic'

To see the other types of publications on this topic, follow the link: Defeasible logic.

Author: Grafiati

Published: 4 June 2021

Last updated: 11 March 2023

Create a spot-on reference in APA, MLA, Chicago, Harvard, and other styles

Select a source type:

Consult the top 50 journal articles for your research on the topic 'Defeasible logic.'

Next to every source in the list of references, there is an 'Add to bibliography' button. Press on it, and we will generate automatically the bibliographic reference to the chosen work in the citation style you need: APA, MLA, Harvard, Chicago, Vancouver, etc.

You can also download the full text of the academic publication as pdf and read online its abstract whenever available in the metadata.

Browse journal articles on a wide variety of disciplines and organise your bibliography correctly.

1

GOVERNATORI, GUIDO, and MICHAEL J. MAHER. "Annotated defeasible logic." Theory and Practice of Logic Programming 17, no. 5-6 (August 22, 2017): 819–36. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/s1471068417000266.

Full text

Abstract:

AbstractDefeasible logics provide several linguistic features to support the expression of defeasible knowledge. There is also a wide variety of such logics, expressing different intuitions about defeasible reasoning. However, the logics can only combine in trivial ways. This limits their usefulness in contexts where different intuitions are at play in different aspects of a problem. In particular, in some legal settings, different actors have different burdens of proof, which might be expressed as reasoning in different defeasible logics. In this paper, we introduce annotated defeasible logic as a flexible formalism permitting multiple forms of defeasibility, and establish some properties of the formalism.

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

2

MAHER, MICHAEL J., ANDREW ROCK, GRIGORIS ANTONIOU, DAVID BILLINGTON, and TRISTAN MILLER. "EFFICIENT DEFEASIBLE REASONING SYSTEMS." International Journal on Artificial Intelligence Tools 10, no. 04 (December 2001): 483–501. http://dx.doi.org/10.1142/s0218213001000623.

Full text

Abstract:

For many years, the non-montonic reasoning community has focussed on highly expressive logics. Such logics have turned out to be computationally expensive, and have given little support to the practical use of non-monotonic reasoning. In this work we discuss defeasible logic, a less-expressive but more efficient non-monotonic logic. We report on two new implemented systems for defeasible logic: a query answering system employing a backward-chaining approach, and a forward-chaining implementation that computes all conclusions. Our experimental evaluation demonstrates that the systems can deal with large theories (up to hundreds of thousands of rules). We show that defeasible logic has linear complexity, which contrasts markedly with most other non-monotonic logics and helps to explain the impressive experimental results. We believe that defeasible logic, with its efficiency and simplicity, is a good candidate to be used as a modeling language for practical applications, including modelling of regulations and business rules.

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

3

MAHER, MICHAEL J. "Propositional defeasible logic has linear complexity." Theory and Practice of Logic Programming 1, no. 6 (November 2001): 691–711. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/s1471068401001168.

Full text

Abstract:

Defeasible logic is a rule-based nonmonotonic logic, with both strict and defeasible rules, and a priority relation on rules. We show that inference in the propositional form of the logic can be performed in linear time. This contrasts markedly with most other propositional nonmonotonic logics, in which inference is intractable.

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

4

MAHER, MICHAEL J., ILIAS TACHMAZIDIS, GRIGORIS ANTONIOU, STEPHEN WADE, and LONG CHENG. "Rethinking Defeasible Reasoning: A Scalable Approach." Theory and Practice of Logic Programming 20, no. 4 (February 24, 2020): 552–86. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/s1471068420000010.

Full text

Abstract:

AbstractRecent technological advances have led to unprecedented amounts of generated data that originate from the Web, sensor networks, and social media. Analytics in terms of defeasible reasoning – for example, for decision making – could provide richer knowledge of the underlying domain. Traditionally, defeasible reasoning has focused on complex knowledge structures over small to medium amounts of data, but recent research efforts have attempted to parallelize the reasoning process over theories with large numbers of facts. Such work has shown that traditional defeasible logics come with overheads that limit scalability. In this work, we design a new logic for defeasible reasoning, thus ensuring scalability by design. We establish several properties of the logic, including its relation to existing defeasible logics. Our experimental results indicate that our approach is indeed scalable and defeasible reasoning can be applied to billions of facts.

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

5

Kontopoulos, Efstratios, Nick Bassiliades, Guido Governatori, and Grigoris Antoniou. "A Modal Defeasible Reasoner of Deontic Logic for the Semantic Web." International Journal on Semantic Web and Information Systems 7, no. 1 (January 2011): 18–43. http://dx.doi.org/10.4018/jswis.2011010102.

Full text

Abstract:

Defeasible logic is a non-monotonic formalism that deals with incomplete and conflicting information, whereas modal logic deals with the concepts of necessity and possibility. These types of logics play a significant role in the emerging Semantic Web, which enriches the available Web information with meaning, leading to better cooperation between end-users and applications. Defeasible and modal logics, in general, and, particularly, deontic logic provide means for modeling agent communities, where each agent is characterized by its cognitive profile and normative system, as well as policies, which define privacy requirements, access permissions, and individual rights. Toward this direction, this article discusses the extension of DR-DEVICE, a Semantic Web-aware defeasible reasoner, with a mechanism for expressing modal logic operators, while testing the implementation via deontic logic operators, concerned with obligations, permissions, and related concepts. The motivation behind this work is to develop a practical defeasible reasoner for the Semantic Web that takes advantage of the expressive power offered by modal logics, accompanied by the flexibility to define diverse agent behaviours. A further incentive is to study the various motivational notions of deontic logic and discuss the cognitive state of agents, as well as the interactions among them.

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

6

Nute, Donald, and Katrin Erk. "Defeasible logic graphs." Decision Support Systems 22, no. 3 (March 1998): 277–93. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/s0167-9236(97)00063-8.

Full text

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

7

Nute, Donald, Zachary Hunter, and Christopher Henderson. "Defeasible logic graphs." Decision Support Systems 22, no. 3 (March 1998): 295–306. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/s0167-9236(97)00064-x.

Full text

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

8

MAIER, FREDERICK. "Interdefinability of defeasible logic and logic programming under the well-founded semantics." Theory and Practice of Logic Programming 13, no. 1 (August 9, 2011): 107–42. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/s147106841100041x.

Full text

Abstract:

AbstractWe provide a method of translating theories of Nute's defeasible logic into logic programs, and a corresponding translation in the opposite direction. Under certain natural restrictions, the conclusions of defeasible theories under the ambiguity propagating defeasible logic ADL correspond to those of the well-founded semantics for normal logic programs, and so it turns out that the two formalisms are closely related. Using the same translation of logic programs into defeasible theories, the semantics for the ambiguity blocking defeasible logic NDL can be seen as indirectly providing an ambiguity blocking semantics for logic programs. We also provide antimonotone operators for both ADL and NDL, each based on the Gelfond–Lifschitz (GL) operator for logic programs. For defeasible theories without defeaters or priorities on rules, the operator for ADL corresponds to the GL operator and so can be seen as partially capturing the consequences according to ADL. Similarly, the operator for NDL captures the consequences according to NDL, though in this case no restrictions on theories apply. Both operators can be used to define stable model semantics for defeasible theories.

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

9

MAHER, MICHAEL J. "Relative expressiveness of defeasible logics." Theory and Practice of Logic Programming 12, no. 4-5 (July 2012): 793–810. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/s1471068412000294.

Full text

Abstract:

AbstractWe address the relative expressiveness of defeasible logics in the frameworkDL. Relative expressiveness is formulated as the ability to simulate the reasoning of one logic within another logic. We show that such simulations must be modular, in the sense that they also work if applied only to part of a theory, in order to achieve a useful notion of relative expressiveness. We present simulations showing that logics inDLwith and without the capability of team defeat are equally expressive. We also show that logics that handle ambiguity differently – ambiguity blocking versus ambiguity propagating – have distinct expressiveness, with neither able to simulate the other under a different formulation of expressiveness.

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

10

ANTONIOU, GRIGORIS, DAVID BILLINGTON, GUIDO GOVERNATORI, and MICHAEL J. MAHER. "Embedding defeasible logic into logic programming." Theory and Practice of Logic Programming 6, no. 06 (October 16, 2006): 703–35. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/s1471068406002778.

Full text

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

11

BILLINGTON, DAVID. "Defeasible Logic is Stable." Journal of Logic and Computation 3, no. 4 (1993): 379–400. http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/logcom/3.4.379.

Full text

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

12

KONTOPOULOS, EFSTRATIOS, NICK BASSILIADES, GRIGORIS ANTONIOU, and ANNA SERIDOU. "VISUAL MODELING OF DEFEASIBLE LOGIC RULES WITH DR-VisMo." International Journal on Artificial Intelligence Tools 17, no. 05 (October 2008): 903–24. http://dx.doi.org/10.1142/s0218213008004217.

Full text

Abstract:

The standardization of the Semantic Web has reached as far as ontologies and ontology languages. However, in order for the full potential of the Semantic Web to be achieved, the ability of reasoning over the available information is also essential. Rules can assist in this affair and various logics have been proposed for the Semantic Web domain. One of them is defeasible reasoning that deals with incomplete and conflicting information. However, despite its solid mathematical notation, it may be confusing to end users. To confront this downside, we proposed a representation schema for defeasible logic rule bases, which is based on directed graphs that feature distinct node and connection types. This paper presents DR-VisMo, a defeasible logic rule base editor and visualization system that implements this representation approach. The system also features a stratification algorithm for visualizing rule bases that deals with decisions, regarding the arrangement of the various elements in the graph. DR-VisMo is implemented as part of VDR-DEVICE, an environment for modeling and deploying defeasible logic rule bases on top of RDF ontologies.

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

13

Giordano, Laura, and Daniele Theseider Dupré. "An ASP approach for reasoning in a concept-aware multipreferential lightweight DL." Theory and Practice of Logic Programming 20, no. 5 (September 2020): 751–66. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/s1471068420000381.

Full text

Abstract:

AbstractIn this paper we develop a concept aware multi-preferential semantics for dealing with typicality in description logics, where preferences are associated with concepts, starting from a collection of ranked TBoxes containing defeasible concept inclusions. Preferences are combined to define a preferential interpretation in which defeasible inclusions can be evaluated. The construction of the concept-aware multipreference semantics is related to Brewka’s framework for qualitative preferences. We exploit Answer Set Programming (in particular, asprin) to achieve defeasible reasoning under the multipreference approach for the lightweight description logic ξ$\mathcal L_ \bot ^ + $.

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

14

Antoniou, Grigoris, David Billington, Guido Governatori, and Michael J. Maher. "Representation results for defeasible logic." ACM Transactions on Computational Logic 2, no. 2 (April 2001): 255–87. http://dx.doi.org/10.1145/371316.371517.

Full text

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

15

Governatori, G. "Argumentation Semantics for Defeasible Logic." Journal of Logic and Computation 14, no. 5 (October 1, 2004): 675–702. http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/logcom/14.5.675.

Full text

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

16

Colburn, Timothy R. "Defeasible reasoning and logic programming." Minds and Machines 1, no. 4 (November 1991): 417–36. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/bf00352918.

Full text

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

17

Antoniou, Grigoris. "Defeasible logic with dynamic priorities." International Journal of Intelligent Systems 19, no. 5 (2004): 463–72. http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/int.20008.

Full text

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

18

Batens, Diderik. "Devising the set of abnormalities for a given defeasible rule." Logical Investigations 26, no. 1 (August 6, 2020): 9–35. http://dx.doi.org/10.21146/2074-1472-2020-26-1-9-35.

Full text

Abstract:

Devising adaptive logics usually starts with a set of abnormalities and a deductive logic. Where the adaptive logic is ampliative, the deductive logic is the lower limit logic, the rules of which are unconditionally valid. Where the adaptive logic is corrective, the deductive logic is the upper limit logic, the rules of which are valid in case the premises do not require any abnormalities to be true. In some cases, the idea for devising an adaptive logic does not relate to a set of abnormalities, but to one or more defeasible rules, and perhaps also to one of the deductive logics. Defeasible rules are not universally valid, but are valid in ‘normal situations’ or for unproblematic parts of premise set. Where the idea is such, the set of abnormalities has to be delineated in view of the rules. The way in which this task may be tackled is by no means obvious and is the main topic studied in the present paper. The outcome is an extremely simple and transparent recipe. It is shown that, except for very special cases, the recipe leads to an adequate result.

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

19

Palau, Gladys. "Carlos E. Alchourrón. Breve biografía intelectual." Crítica (México D. F. En línea) 28, no. 82 (January 8, 1996): 3–12. http://dx.doi.org/10.22201/iifs.18704905e.1996.1031.

Full text

Abstract:

This paper is a short intellectual biography of Professor Carlos E. Alchourrón. I analyze his main contributions in three fields: 1) the logic of normative systems, 2) the logic of theory change, and 3) the logic of defeasible conditionals. I review the historical development of his thought on these three subjects. Furthermore, I show how the problems that arise in the field of normative logic stimulated him to find solutions in the AGM theory and in defeasible logic. Lastly, I show how in his last papers these three fields converge in a general englobing approach.

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

20

Trelles, Oscar. "Donald Nute (ed.): Defeasible Deontic Logic." Areté 13, no. 2 (December 1, 2001): 183–93. http://dx.doi.org/10.18800/arete.200102.008.

Full text

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

21

Walton, Douglas. "Reasoning about knowledge using defeasible logic." Argument & Computation 2, no. 2-3 (September 2011): 131–55. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/19462166.2011.637641.

Full text

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

22

Billington, David. "Proving quantified literals in defeasible logic." Information Sciences 116, no. 1 (May 1999): 55–81. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/s0020-0255(98)10093-2.

Full text

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

23

GARCÍA, ALEJANDRO J., and GUILLERMO R. SIMARI. "Defeasible logic programming: an argumentative approach." Theory and Practice of Logic Programming 4, no. 1+2 (January 2004): 95–138. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/s1471068403001674.

Full text

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

24

Belzer, M. "A conditional logic for defeasible beliefs." Decision Support Systems 4, no. 1 (March 1988): 129–42. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/0167-9236(88)90102-9.

Full text

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

25

Maier, Frederick, and Donald Nute. "Well-founded semantics for defeasible logic." Synthese 176, no. 2 (March 18, 2009): 243–74. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11229-009-9492-1.

Full text

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

26

BRIGUEZ, CRISTIAN E., MARCELA CAPOBIANCO, and ANA G. MAGUITMAN. "A THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK FOR TRUST-BASED NEWS RECOMMENDER SYSTEMS AND ITS IMPLEMENTATION USING DEFEASIBLE ARGUMENTATION." International Journal on Artificial Intelligence Tools 22, no. 04 (August 2013): 1350021. http://dx.doi.org/10.1142/s0218213013500218.

Full text

Abstract:

Although the importance of trust in recommender systems is widely recognized, the actual mechanisms of trust propagation and trust preservation are poorly understood. This is partly due to the fact that trust is a complex notion, which is typically context dependent, subjective, dynamic and not always transitive or symmetrical. This paper presents a theoretical analysis of the notion of trust in news recommendation and discusses the advantages of modeling this notion using Defeasible Logic Programming, a general-purpose defeasible argumentation formalism based on logic programming. In the proposed framework, users can express explicit trust statements on news reports, news sources and other users. Trust is then modeled and propagated using a dialectical process supported by a Defeasible Logic Programming interpreter. A set of basic postulates for trust and their representation by means of defeasible rules is presented. The suitability of the approach is investigated with a set of illustrative examples and then analyzed from a formal perspective. The obtained results indicate that the proposed framework provides a solid foundation for building trust-based news recommendation services.

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

27

Antoniou, G., M. J. Maher, and D. Billington. "Defeasible logic versus Logic Programming without Negation as Failure." Journal of Logic Programming 42, no. 1 (January 2000): 47–57. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/s0743-1066(99)00060-6.

Full text

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

28

Billi, Marco, Roberta Calegari, Giuseppe Contissa, Francesca Lagioia, Giuseppe Pisano, Galileo Sartor, and Giovanni Sartor. "Argumentation and Defeasible Reasoning in the Law." J 4, no. 4 (December 18, 2021): 897–914. http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/j4040061.

Full text

Abstract:

Different formalisms for defeasible reasoning have been used to represent knowledge and reason in the legal field. In this work, we provide an overview of the following logic-based approaches to defeasible reasoning: defeasible logic, Answer Set Programming, ABA+, ASPIC+, and DeLP. We compare features of these approaches under three perspectives: the logical model (knowledge representation), the method (computational mechanisms), and the technology (available software resources). On top of that, two real examples in the legal domain are designed and implemented in ASPIC+ to showcase the benefit of an argumentation approach in real-world domains. The CrossJustice and Interlex projects are taken as a testbed, and experiments are conducted with the Arg2P technology.

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

29

Alferes, José Júlio, Ricardo Gonçalves, and João Leite. "Equivalence of defeasible normative systems." Journal of Applied Non-Classical Logics 23, no. 1-2 (June 2013): 25–48. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/11663081.2013.798996.

Full text

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

30

MOGUILLANSKY, MARTÍN O., NICOLÁS D. ROTSTEIN, MARCELO A. FALAPPA, ALEJANDRO J. GARCÍA, and GUILLERMO R. SIMARI. "Dynamics of knowledge in DeLP through Argument Theory Change." Theory and Practice of Logic Programming 13, no. 6 (January 25, 2012): 893–957. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/s1471068411000603.

Full text

Abstract:

AbstractThis article is devoted to the study of methods to change defeasible logic programs (de.l.p.s) which are the knowledge bases used by the Defeasible Logic Programming (DeLP) interpreter. DeLP is an argumentation formalism that allows to reason over potentially inconsistent de.l.p.s. Argument Theory Change (ATC) studies certain aspects of belief revision in order to make them suitable for abstract argumentation systems. In this article, abstract arguments are rendered concrete by using the particular rule-based defeasible logic adopted by DeLP. The objective of our proposal is to define prioritized argument revision operators à la ATC for de.l.p.s, in such a way that the newly inserted argument ends up undefeated after the revision, thus warranting its conclusion. In order to ensure this warrant, the de.l.p. has to be changed in concordance with a minimal change principle. To this end, we discuss different minimal change criteria that could be adopted. Finally, an algorithm is presented, implementing the argument revision operations.

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

31

Rohaninezh, Mahdi, Shereena Mohd Arif, and Shahrul Azman Mohd Noah. "Defeasible Logic-Based Strategies to Regulate Facebook." Journal of Applied Sciences 14, no. 22 (November 1, 2014): 2953–66. http://dx.doi.org/10.3923/jas.2014.2953.2966.

Full text

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

32

Dong, Huimin. "Logic of defeasible permission and its dynamics." Journal of Logic and Computation 31, no. 4 (May 5, 2021): 1158–93. http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/logcom/exab022.

Full text

Abstract:

Abstract This paper develops a deontic logic for defeasible permission and studies norm change in various updated semantics. When one grants that $\varphi $ or $\psi $ is permitted, normally, it goes together with the conjunction of a permission of $\varphi $ and that of $\psi $. In the monotonic reasoning on this permission, a permission of $\varphi $ leads to a permission of $\varphi $ and $\psi $; however, if a prohibition of $\psi $ is introduced, we get into trouble. We face a paradox of free choice permission. Many solutions have been proposed, but a systematic account of handling norm change is still needed. This paper first introduces the notion of normality to develop a sound and complete deontic logic for defeasible permission, which can be used to analyse several notions in natural language and in game theory. Further, following Lewis’ idea of norm change, a systematic way to capture various dynamics for updating permission and obligation is proposed.

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

33

Rohaninezhad, Mehdi, Shereena Mohd Arif, and Shahrul Azman Mohd Noah. "A grounder for SPINdle defeasible logic reasoner." Expert Systems with Applications 42, no. 20 (November 2015): 7098–109. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.eswa.2015.04.065.

Full text

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

34

Ryu, Young U. "Conditional deontic logic augmented with defeasible reasoning." Data & Knowledge Engineering 16, no. 1 (July 1995): 73–91. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/0169-023x(95)00008-g.

Full text

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

35

Pensel, Maximilian. "A Lightweight Defeasible Description Logic in Depth." KI - Künstliche Intelligenz 34, no. 4 (February 12, 2020): 527–31. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s13218-020-00644-z.

Full text

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

36

Nute, Donald, Robert I. Mann, and Betty F. Brewer. "Controlling expert system recommendations with defeasible logic." Decision Support Systems 6, no. 2 (May 1990): 153–64. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/0167-9236(90)90005-c.

Full text

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

37

Geerts, P., D. Vermeir, and D. Nute. "Ordered logic: defeasible reasoning for multiple agents." Decision Support Systems 11, no. 2 (February 1994): 157–90. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/0167-9236(94)90030-2.

Full text

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

38

Bonatti, P. A., C. Lutz, and F. Wolter. "The Complexity of Circumscription in DLs." Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 35 (August 26, 2009): 717–73. http://dx.doi.org/10.1613/jair.2763.

Full text

Abstract:

As fragments of first-order logic, Description logics (DLs) do not provide nonmonotonic features such as defeasible inheritance and default rules. Since many applications would benefit from the availability of such features, several families of nonmonotonic DLs have been developed that are mostly based on default logic and autoepistemic logic. In this paper, we consider circumscription as an interesting alternative approach to nonmonotonic DLs that, in particular, supports defeasible inheritance in a natural way. We study DLs extended with circumscription under different language restrictions and under different constraints on the sets of minimized, fixed, and varying predicates, and pinpoint the exact computational complexity of reasoning for DLs ranging from ALC to ALCIO and ALCQO. When the minimized and fixed predicates include only concept names but no role names, then reasoning is complete for NExpTime^NP. It becomes complete for NP^NExpTime when the number of minimized and fixed predicates is bounded by a constant. If roles can be minimized or fixed, then complexity ranges from NExpTime^NP to undecidability.

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

39

Almpani, Sofia, Elena Lisanyuk, and Andrew Schumann. "Trends in Argumentation Logic." Studia Humana 11, no. 3-4 (December 1, 2022): 1–5. http://dx.doi.org/10.2478/sh-2022-0010.

Full text

Abstract:

Abstract In this paper, we introduce the subject of the special issue Trends in Argumentation Logic. Here we mainly describe two approaches to argumentation logic with explicating monotonic and non-monotonic, or defeasible, reasoning and explain the role of artificial intelligence in applying argumentation logic. Then we give a short overview of the papers contributed to the special issue.

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

40

Bassiliades, Nick, Grigoris Antoniou, and Ioannis Vlahavas. "A Defeasible Logic Reasoner for the Semantic Web." International Journal on Semantic Web and Information Systems 2, no. 1 (January 2006): 1–41. http://dx.doi.org/10.4018/jswis.2006010101.

Full text

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

41

You, Jia-Huai, Xianchang Wang, and Li Yan Yuan. "Compiling defeasible inheritance networks to general logic programs." Artificial Intelligence 113, no. 1-2 (September 1999): 247–68. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/s0004-3702(99)00055-7.

Full text

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

42

Governatori, Guido, Francesco Olivieri, Antonino Rotolo, and Simone Scannapieco. "Computing Strong and Weak Permissions in Defeasible Logic." Journal of Philosophical Logic 42, no. 6 (September 17, 2013): 799–829. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10992-013-9295-1.

Full text

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

43

Covington, M. A. "Logical control of an elevator with defeasible logic." IEEE Transactions on Automatic Control 45, no. 7 (July 2000): 1347–49. http://dx.doi.org/10.1109/9.867045.

Full text

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

44

Prakken, Henry, and Giovanni Sartor. "Argument-based extended logic programming with defeasible priorities." Journal of Applied Non-Classical Logics 7, no. 1-2 (January 1997): 25–75. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/11663081.1997.10510900.

Full text

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

45

Grooters, Diana, and Henry Prakken. "Two Aspects of Relevance in Structured Argumentation: Minimality and Paraconsistency." Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 56 (June 15, 2016): 197–245. http://dx.doi.org/10.1613/jair.5058.

Full text

Abstract:

This paper studies two issues concerning relevance in structured argumentation in the context of the ASPIC+ framework, arising from the combined use of strict and defeasible inference rules. One issue arises if the strict inference rules correspond to classical logic. A longstanding problem is how the trivialising effect of the classical Ex Falso principle can be avoided while satisfying consistency and closure postulates. In this paper, this problem is solved by disallowing chaining of strict rules, resulting in a variant of the ASPIC+ framework called ASPIC*, and then disallowing the application of strict rules to inconsistent sets of formulas. Thus in effect Rescher & Manor's paraconsistent notion of weak consequence is embedded in ASPIC*. Another issue is minimality of arguments. If arguments can apply defeasible inference rules, then they cannot be required to have subset-minimal premises, since defeasible rules based on more information may well make an argument stronger. In this paper instead minimality is required of applications of strict rules throughout an argument. It is shown that under some plausible assumptions this does not affect the set of conclusions. In addition, circular arguments are in the new ASPIC* framework excluded in a way that satisfies closure and consistency postulates and that generates finitary argumentation frameworks if the knowledge base and set of defeasible rules are finite. For the latter result the exclusion of chaining of strict rules is essential. Finally, the combined results of this paper are shown to be a proper extension of classical-logic argumentation with preferences and defeasible rules.

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

46

VREESWIJK, GERARD. "Defeasible Dialectics: A Controversy-Oriented Approach towards Defeasible Argumentation." Journal of Logic and Computation 3, no. 3 (1993): 317–34. http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/logcom/3.3.317.

Full text

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

47

Hu, Ivan. "Defeasible Tolerance and the Sorites." Journal of Philosophy 117, no. 4 (2020): 181–218. http://dx.doi.org/10.5840/jphil2020117413.

Full text

Abstract:

I propose a novel solution to the Sorites Paradox. The account vindicates the tolerance of vague predicates in a way that properly addresses the normativity of vagueness while avoiding sorites contradiction, by treating sorites reasoning as a type of defeasible reasoning. I show how this can be done within the setting of a nonmonotonic deontic logic. Central to the proposal is its deontic interpretation of tolerance. I draw a key distinction between two types of tolerance, based on different deontic notions, and show how the account captures key differences between these types of sorites reasoning. I compare the resulting theory to various existing contextualist proposals and argue that it better accounts for the normative aspects of sorites reasoning.

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

48

Alessio, Cláudio Andrés. "Argumentos Máximamente Específicos en Argumentación Rebatible." Manuscrito 39, no. 2 (September 29, 2016): 5–58. http://dx.doi.org/10.1590/0100-6045.2016.v39n2.caa.

Full text

Abstract:

Resumen DeLP (Defeasible Logic Programming) is a defeasible argumentation system that captures common sense reasoning features. Examples proposed in the literature show that DeLP gets counterintuitive results. We suggest a possible cause of this problem and we propose an approach to neutralize it. The approach is based on the pre-selection criterion of arguments, called maximal specificity. The criterion establishes that an argument will be considered like maximally specific only if, for every argument based on more specific evidence which does not explain the same conclusion, it explains neither the contrary nor something more general.

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

49

GÓMEZ, SERGIO ALEJANDRO, CARLOS IVÁN CHESÑEVAR, and GUILLERMO RICARDO SIMARI. "DEFEASIBLE REASONING IN WEB-BASED FORMS THROUGH ARGUMENTATION." International Journal of Information Technology & Decision Making 07, no. 01 (March 2008): 71–101. http://dx.doi.org/10.1142/s021962200800282x.

Full text

Abstract:

The notion of forms as a way of organizing and presenting data has been used since the beginning of the World Wide Web. Web-based forms have evolved together with the development of new markup languages, in which it is possible to provide validation scripts as part of the form code to test whether the intended meaning of the form is correct. However, for the form designer, part of this intended meaning frequently involves other features which are not constraints by themselves, but rather attributes emerging from the form, which provide plausible conclusions in the context of incomplete and potentially inconsistent information. As the value of such attributes may change in presence of new knowledge, we call them defeasible attributes. In this paper, we propose extending traditional web-based forms to incorporate defeasible attributes as part of the knowledge that can be encoded by the form designer. The proposed extension allows the specification of scripts for reasoning about form fields using a defeasible knowledge base, expressed in terms of a Defeasible Logic Program.

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

50

LIAO, Bei-Shui. "A Defeasible Logic-Based Flexible Agent for Autonomic Computing." Journal of Software 19, no. 3 (July 9, 2008): 605–20. http://dx.doi.org/10.3724/sp.j.1001.2008.00605.

Full text

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

We offer discounts on all premium plans for authors whose works are included in thematic literature selections. Contact us to get a unique promo code!