Location
University of Windsor
Document Type
Paper
Keywords
argumentation schemes, critical questions, artificial intelligence, Carneades system, shifting initiative in dialogue, argument from expert opinion, argument evaluation
Start Date
18-5-2011 9:00 AM
End Date
21-5-2011 5:00 PM
Abstract
This paper shows how the critical questions matching an argumentation scheme can be mod-eled in the Carneades argumentation system as three kinds of premises. Ordinary premises hold only if they are supported by sufficient arguments. Assumptions hold, by default, until they have been questioned. With exceptions the negation holds, by default, until the exception has been supported by sufficient arguments. By “sufficient arguments”, we mean arguments sufficient to satisfy the applicable proof standard.
Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
Included in
Modeling critical questions as additional premises
University of Windsor
This paper shows how the critical questions matching an argumentation scheme can be mod-eled in the Carneades argumentation system as three kinds of premises. Ordinary premises hold only if they are supported by sufficient arguments. Assumptions hold, by default, until they have been questioned. With exceptions the negation holds, by default, until the exception has been supported by sufficient arguments. By “sufficient arguments”, we mean arguments sufficient to satisfy the applicable proof standard.
