Automated argumentation mining to the rescue? Envisioning argumentation and decision-making support for debates in open online collaboration communities

In this subsection we discuss two frameworks enabling to handle necessary support through the addition of complex attacks. According to the various interpretations of the

This means that in Example 1, the patient should practice diet and exer- cise, take either sulfonylurea or meglitinide for his diabetes problem in order to reduce blood glucose,

Given bipolar argumentation frameworks, Cayrol and Lagasquie-Schiex [8] define supported and secondary attacks based on attack and support as shown in Figure 2.a-b.. SUPPORTED ATTACKS

developed model also philosophically more relevant implicit arguments), to help us get a more precise understanding of what assumptions are made and what is at stake in a given

In the context of bipolar argumentation (argumentation with two kinds of interaction, attacks and supports), we present an axiomatic approach for taking into account a

The defeasible rule (ρ Z 2 04 ) of Zermelo’s 1904 argument, which claims that no one has called the Axiom of Choice into doubt, is clearly weaker than Peano’s defeasible rule (ρ P 1

However, a bipolar argumentation framework extends Dung’s abstract argumentation framework with a second binary relation ⇒ among arguments, representing support among arguments, and

A group customisation strategy allows one member or leader, or various respected members, to customise the Virtual Store application configurations with the in-group’s