• Documents
  • Authors
  • Tables
  • Log in
  • Sign up
  • MetaCart
  • DMCA
  • Donate

CiteSeerX logo

Tools

Sorted by:
Try your query at:
Semantic Scholar Scholar Academic
Google Bing DBLP
Results 1 - 10 of 331
Next 10 →

The inductive approach to verifying cryptographic protocols

by Lawrence C. Paulson - Journal of Computer Security , 1998
"... Informal arguments that cryptographic protocols are secure can be made rigorous using inductive definitions. The approach is based on ordinary predicate calculus and copes with infinite-state systems. Proofs are generated using Isabelle/HOL. The human effort required to analyze a protocol can be as ..."
Abstract - Cited by 480 (29 self) - Add to MetaCart
Informal arguments that cryptographic protocols are secure can be made rigorous using inductive definitions. The approach is based on ordinary predicate calculus and copes with infinite-state systems. Proofs are generated using Isabelle/HOL. The human effort required to analyze a protocol can

Persuasion in practical argument using value-based argumentation frameworks

by Trevor J. M. Bench-capon - Journal of Logic and Computation , 2003
"... In many cases of disagreement, particularly in situations involving practical reasoning, it is impossible to demonstrate conclusively that either party is wrong. The role of argument in such cases is to persuade rather than to prove, demonstrate or refute. Following Perelman, we argue that persuasio ..."
Abstract - Cited by 181 (27 self) - Add to MetaCart
that persuasion in such cases relies on a recognition that the strength of an argument depends on the social values that it advances, and that whether the attack of one argument on another succeeds depends on the comparative strength of the values advanced by the arguments concerned. To model this we extend

Weighted attacks in argumentation frameworks

by Sylvie Coste-marquis, Sébastien Konieczny, Pierre Marquis, Mohand Akli Ouali - In Proceedings of the Thirteenth International Conference on Principles of Knowledge Representation and Reasoning (KR’12 , 2012
"... Recently, (Dunne et al. 2009; 2011) have suggested to weight attacks within Dung’s abstract argumentation frameworks, and introduced the concept of WAF (Weighted Argumentation Framework). However, they use WAFs in a very specific way for relaxing attacks. The aim of this paper is to explore ways to ..."
Abstract - Cited by 4 (1 self) - Add to MetaCart
Recently, (Dunne et al. 2009; 2011) have suggested to weight attacks within Dung’s abstract argumentation frameworks, and introduced the concept of WAF (Weighted Argumentation Framework). However, they use WAFs in a very specific way for relaxing attacks. The aim of this paper is to explore ways

Dialectic Semantics for Argumentation Frameworks

by H. Jakobovits, D. Vermeir - In ICAIL , 1999
"... We provide a formalism for the study of dialogues, where a dialogue is a two-person game, initiated by the proponent who defends a proposed thesis. We examine several different winning criteria and several different dialogue types, where a dialogue type is determined by a set of positions, an attack ..."
Abstract - Cited by 52 (1 self) - Add to MetaCart
, an attack relation between positions and a legal-move function. We examine two proof theories, where a proof theory is determined by a dialogue type and a winning criterion. For each of the proof theories we supply a corresponding declarative semantics. 1 Introduction Artificial intelligence has long dealt

Persuasion in Practical Argument Using Value Based Argumentation Frameworks

by T.J.M. Bench-Capon , 2002
"... In many cases of disagreement, particularly in situations involving practical reasoning, it is impossible to demonstrate conclusively that either party is wrong. The role of argument in such cases is to persuade rather than to prove, demonstrate or refute. Following Perelman, we argue that persuasi ..."
Abstract - Cited by 77 (24 self) - Add to MetaCart
that persuasion in such cases relies on a recognition that the strength of an argument depends on the social values that it advances, and that whether the attack of one argument on another succeeds depends on the comparative strength of the values advanced by the arguments concerned.

Symmetric argumentation frameworks

by Sylvie Coste-marquis, Caroline Devred, Pierre Marquis - Proc. ����� European Conf. on Symbolic and Quantitative Approaches to Reasoning With Uncertainty (ECSQARU), volume 3571 of LNAI , 2005
"... Abstract. This paper is centered on the family of Dung’s finite argumentation frameworks when the attacks relation is symmetric (and nonempty and irreflexive). We show that while this family does not contain any well-founded framework, every element of it is both coherent and relatively grounded. Th ..."
Abstract - Cited by 41 (7 self) - Add to MetaCart
Abstract. This paper is centered on the family of Dung’s finite argumentation frameworks when the attacks relation is symmetric (and nonempty and irreflexive). We show that while this family does not contain any well-founded framework, every element of it is both coherent and relatively grounded

Coherence and flexibility in dialogue games for argumentation

by Henry Prakken - JOURNAL OF LOGIC AND COMPUTATION , 2005
"... This article carries out a formal study of dialogue games for argumentation. A formal framework for such games is proposed which imposes an explicit reply structure on dialogues, where each dialogue move either attacks or surrenders to some earlier move of the other participant. The framework is fle ..."
Abstract - Cited by 100 (17 self) - Add to MetaCart
This article carries out a formal study of dialogue games for argumentation. A formal framework for such games is proposed which imposes an explicit reply structure on dialogues, where each dialogue move either attacks or surrenders to some earlier move of the other participant. The framework

An abstract argumentation framework with varied-strength attacks

by Diego C. Martı́nez, Ro J. Garcı́a, Guillermo R. Simari - in: Proceedings of the 11th International Conference on Principles of Knowledge Representation and Reasoning (KR’08 , 2008
"... In classical abstract argumentation, arguments interact with each other through a single abstract notion of attack. How-ever, several concrete forms of argument conflict are present in the literature, all of them of different nature and strength for a particular context. In this work we define an ar ..."
Abstract - Cited by 8 (0 self) - Add to MetaCart
an argumen-tation framework equipped with a set of abstract attack re-lations of varied strength. Using this framework, semantic notions dealing with the relative difference of strength are in-troduced. The focus is put on argument defense, and the study of admissible sets according to the quality

Computing Argumentation in Logic Programming

by Antonios C. Kakas, Francesca Toni - Journal of Logic and Computation , 1999
"... In recent years, argumentation has been shown to be an appropriate framework in which logic programming with negation as failure as well as other logics for non-monotonic reasoning can be encompassed. Many of the existing semantics for negation as failure in logic programming can be understood in a ..."
Abstract - Cited by 72 (15 self) - Add to MetaCart
In recent years, argumentation has been shown to be an appropriate framework in which logic programming with negation as failure as well as other logics for non-monotonic reasoning can be encompassed. Many of the existing semantics for negation as failure in logic programming can be understood in a

Prudent semantics for argumentation frameworks

by Sylvie Coste-marquis, Caroline Devred, Pierre Marquis - In ICTAI’05
"... coste,devred,marquis¢ We present new prudent semantics within Dung’s theory of argumentation. Under such prudent semantics, two arguments cannot belong to the same extension whenever one of them attacks indirectly the other one. We argue that our semantics lead to a better handling of controversial ..."
Abstract - Cited by 18 (3 self) - Add to MetaCart
coste,devred,marquis¢ We present new prudent semantics within Dung’s theory of argumentation. Under such prudent semantics, two arguments cannot belong to the same extension whenever one of them attacks indirectly the other one. We argue that our semantics lead to a better handling of controversial
Next 10 →
Results 1 - 10 of 331
Powered by: Apache Solr
  • About CiteSeerX
  • Submit and Index Documents
  • Privacy Policy
  • Help
  • Data
  • Source
  • Contact Us

Developed at and hosted by The College of Information Sciences and Technology

© 2007-2019 The Pennsylvania State University