Skepticism relations for comparing argumentation semantics

The issue of formalizing skepticism relations between argumentation semantics has been considered only recently in the literature. In this paper we provide a twofold contribution to this kind of analysis. First, starting from the traditional concepts of skeptical and credulous acceptance, we introdu...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:International journal of approximate reasoning 2009-06, Vol.50 (6), p.854-866
Main Authors: Baroni, Pietro, Giacomin, Massimiliano
Format: Article
Language:English
Subjects:
Argumentation semantics
Argumentation theory
Skepticism relations
Citations: Items that this one cites
Items that cite this one
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
cited_by cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c473t-fca131c5a5beddeb095921ebeacb5570cc37604a41fa76d39c2057ebec2781c83
cites cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c473t-fca131c5a5beddeb095921ebeacb5570cc37604a41fa76d39c2057ebec2781c83
container_end_page 866
container_issue 6
container_start_page 854
container_title International journal of approximate reasoning
container_volume 50
creator Baroni, Pietro
Giacomin, Massimiliano
description The issue of formalizing skepticism relations between argumentation semantics has been considered only recently in the literature. In this paper we provide a twofold contribution to this kind of analysis. First, starting from the traditional concepts of skeptical and credulous acceptance, we introduce a comprehensive set of seven skepticism relations, which provide a formal counterpart to several alternative notions of skepticism at an intuitive level. Then we carry out a systematic comparison of a significant set of literature semantics (namely grounded, complete, preferred, stable, semi-stable, ideal, prudent and CF 2 semantics) on the basis of the proposed skepticism relations.
doi_str_mv 10.1016/j.ijar.2009.02.006
format article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_903642097</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><els_id>S0888613X09000383</els_id><sourcerecordid>903642097</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c473t-fca131c5a5beddeb095921ebeacb5570cc37604a41fa76d39c2057ebec2781c83</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNp9kLtOxDAQRS0EEsvCD1Clgiph_EjsIBqEeEkrUQASneU4k5VDXthZJP4eL0u91RT3nBnNJeScQkaBFldt5lrjMwZQZsAygOKALKiSPBWS00OyAKVUWlD-cUxOQmghElKoBbl-_cRpdtaFPvHYmdmNQ0ia0Sd27Cfj3bBOjF9vehzmvzAJ2JshGuGUHDWmC3j2P5fk_eH-7e4pXb08Pt_drlIbb89pYw3l1OYmr7CusYIyLxnFCo2t8lyCtVwWIIygjZFFzUvLIJcxt0wqahVfksvd3smPXxsMs-5dsNh1ZsBxE3QJvBAMShnJi70kF0IWSmxBtgOtH0Pw2OjJu974H01BbwvVrd4WqreFamA61hWlm52E8dlvh14H63CwWDuPdtb16Pbpv-oigB0</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>34476847</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Skepticism relations for comparing argumentation semantics</title><source>ScienceDirect Journals</source><creator>Baroni, Pietro ; Giacomin, Massimiliano</creator><creatorcontrib>Baroni, Pietro ; Giacomin, Massimiliano</creatorcontrib><description>The issue of formalizing skepticism relations between argumentation semantics has been considered only recently in the literature. In this paper we provide a twofold contribution to this kind of analysis. First, starting from the traditional concepts of skeptical and credulous acceptance, we introduce a comprehensive set of seven skepticism relations, which provide a formal counterpart to several alternative notions of skepticism at an intuitive level. Then we carry out a systematic comparison of a significant set of literature semantics (namely grounded, complete, preferred, stable, semi-stable, ideal, prudent and CF 2 semantics) on the basis of the proposed skepticism relations.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0888-613X</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1873-4731</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1016/j.ijar.2009.02.006</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Elsevier Inc</publisher><subject>Argumentation semantics ; Argumentation theory ; Skepticism relations</subject><ispartof>International journal of approximate reasoning, 2009-06, Vol.50 (6), p.854-866</ispartof><rights>2009 Elsevier Inc.</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c473t-fca131c5a5beddeb095921ebeacb5570cc37604a41fa76d39c2057ebec2781c83</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c473t-fca131c5a5beddeb095921ebeacb5570cc37604a41fa76d39c2057ebec2781c83</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><link.rule.ids>314,780,784,27924,27925</link.rule.ids></links><search><creatorcontrib>Baroni, Pietro</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Giacomin, Massimiliano</creatorcontrib><title>Skepticism relations for comparing argumentation semantics</title><title>International journal of approximate reasoning</title><description>The issue of formalizing skepticism relations between argumentation semantics has been considered only recently in the literature. In this paper we provide a twofold contribution to this kind of analysis. First, starting from the traditional concepts of skeptical and credulous acceptance, we introduce a comprehensive set of seven skepticism relations, which provide a formal counterpart to several alternative notions of skepticism at an intuitive level. Then we carry out a systematic comparison of a significant set of literature semantics (namely grounded, complete, preferred, stable, semi-stable, ideal, prudent and CF 2 semantics) on the basis of the proposed skepticism relations.</description><subject>Argumentation semantics</subject><subject>Argumentation theory</subject><subject>Skepticism relations</subject><issn>0888-613X</issn><issn>1873-4731</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2009</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><recordid>eNp9kLtOxDAQRS0EEsvCD1Clgiph_EjsIBqEeEkrUQASneU4k5VDXthZJP4eL0u91RT3nBnNJeScQkaBFldt5lrjMwZQZsAygOKALKiSPBWS00OyAKVUWlD-cUxOQmghElKoBbl-_cRpdtaFPvHYmdmNQ0ia0Sd27Cfj3bBOjF9vehzmvzAJ2JshGuGUHDWmC3j2P5fk_eH-7e4pXb08Pt_drlIbb89pYw3l1OYmr7CusYIyLxnFCo2t8lyCtVwWIIygjZFFzUvLIJcxt0wqahVfksvd3smPXxsMs-5dsNh1ZsBxE3QJvBAMShnJi70kF0IWSmxBtgOtH0Pw2OjJu974H01BbwvVrd4WqreFamA61hWlm52E8dlvh14H63CwWDuPdtb16Pbpv-oigB0</recordid><startdate>20090601</startdate><enddate>20090601</enddate><creator>Baroni, Pietro</creator><creator>Giacomin, Massimiliano</creator><general>Elsevier Inc</general><scope>6I.</scope><scope>AAFTH</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7SC</scope><scope>8FD</scope><scope>JQ2</scope><scope>L7M</scope><scope>L~C</scope><scope>L~D</scope></search><sort><creationdate>20090601</creationdate><title>Skepticism relations for comparing argumentation semantics</title><author>Baroni, Pietro ; Giacomin, Massimiliano</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c473t-fca131c5a5beddeb095921ebeacb5570cc37604a41fa76d39c2057ebec2781c83</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2009</creationdate><topic>Argumentation semantics</topic><topic>Argumentation theory</topic><topic>Skepticism relations</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Baroni, Pietro</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Giacomin, Massimiliano</creatorcontrib><collection>ScienceDirect Open Access Titles</collection><collection>Elsevier:ScienceDirect:Open Access</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>Computer and Information Systems Abstracts</collection><collection>Technology Research Database</collection><collection>ProQuest Computer Science Collection</collection><collection>Advanced Technologies Database with Aerospace</collection><collection>Computer and Information Systems Abstracts – Academic</collection><collection>Computer and Information Systems Abstracts Professional</collection><jtitle>International journal of approximate reasoning</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Baroni, Pietro</au><au>Giacomin, Massimiliano</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Skepticism relations for comparing argumentation semantics</atitle><jtitle>International journal of approximate reasoning</jtitle><date>2009-06-01</date><risdate>2009</risdate><volume>50</volume><issue>6</issue><spage>854</spage><epage>866</epage><pages>854-866</pages><issn>0888-613X</issn><eissn>1873-4731</eissn><abstract>The issue of formalizing skepticism relations between argumentation semantics has been considered only recently in the literature. In this paper we provide a twofold contribution to this kind of analysis. First, starting from the traditional concepts of skeptical and credulous acceptance, we introduce a comprehensive set of seven skepticism relations, which provide a formal counterpart to several alternative notions of skepticism at an intuitive level. Then we carry out a systematic comparison of a significant set of literature semantics (namely grounded, complete, preferred, stable, semi-stable, ideal, prudent and CF 2 semantics) on the basis of the proposed skepticism relations.</abstract><pub>Elsevier Inc</pub><doi>10.1016/j.ijar.2009.02.006</doi><tpages>13</tpages><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 0888-613X
ispartof International journal of approximate reasoning, 2009-06, Vol.50 (6), p.854-866
issn 0888-613X
1873-4731
language eng
recordid cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_903642097
source ScienceDirect Journals
subjects Argumentation semantics
Argumentation theory
Skepticism relations
title Skepticism relations for comparing argumentation semantics
url http://sfxeu10.hosted.exlibrisgroup.com/loughborough?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2024-12-28T06%3A04%3A24IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Skepticism%20relations%20for%20comparing%20argumentation%20semantics&rft.jtitle=International%20journal%20of%20approximate%20reasoning&rft.au=Baroni,%20Pietro&rft.date=2009-06-01&rft.volume=50&rft.issue=6&rft.spage=854&rft.epage=866&rft.pages=854-866&rft.issn=0888-613X&rft.eissn=1873-4731&rft_id=info:doi/10.1016/j.ijar.2009.02.006&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E903642097%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Cgrp_id%3Ecdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c473t-fca131c5a5beddeb095921ebeacb5570cc37604a41fa76d39c2057ebec2781c83%3C/grp_id%3E%3Coa%3E%3C/oa%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=34476847&rft_id=info:pmid/&rfr_iscdi=true