• français
    • English
  • English 
    • français
    • English
  • Login
JavaScript is disabled for your browser. Some features of this site may not work without it.
BIRD Home

Browse

This CollectionBy Issue DateAuthorsTitlesSubjectsJournals BIRDResearch centres & CollectionsBy Issue DateAuthorsTitlesSubjectsJournals

My Account

Login

Statistics

View Usage Statistics

Argument Schemes and Critical Questions for Decision Aiding Process

Thumbnail
View/Open
comma08.pdf (98.89Kb)
comma08_presentation.pdf (662.3Kb)
Date
2008
Collection title
Frontiers in Artificial Intelligence and Applications
Collection Id
172
Dewey
Recherche opérationnelle
Sujet
Decision aiding; argument schemes; critical questions
Conference name
2nd International Conference on Computational Models of Argument (COMMA 2008)
Conference date
05-2008
Conference city
Toulouse
Conference country
France
Book title
Computational Models of Argument - Proceedings of COMMA 2008
Author
Besnard, Philippe; Doutre, Sylvie; Hunter, Anthony
Publisher
IOS Press
Publisher city
Amsterdam
Year
2008
Pages number
440
ISBN
978-1-58603-859-5
URI
https://basepub.dauphine.fr/handle/123456789/5076
Collections
  • LAMSADE : Publications
Metadata
Show full item record
Author
Ouerdane, Wassila
Maudet, Nicolas
Tsoukiàs, Alexis
Type
Communication / Conférence
Item number of pages
285-296
Abstract (EN)
Our ambition in this paper is to begin to specify in argumentative terms (some of) the steps involved in a decision-aiding process. To do that, we make use of the popular notion of argument schemes, and specify the related critical questions. A hierarchical structure of argument schemes allows to decompose the process into several distinct steps—and for each of them the underlying premises are made explicit, which allows in turn to identify how these steps can be dialectically defeated via critical questions. This work initiates a systematic study which aims at constituting a significant step forward for forthcoming decision-aiding tools. The kind of system that we foresee and sketch here would allow: (i) to present a rec- ommendation that can be explicitly justified; (ii) to revise any piece of reasoning involved in this process, and be informed of the consequences of such moves; and possibly (iii) to stimulate the client by generating contradictory arguments.

  • Accueil Bibliothèque
  • Site de l'Université Paris-Dauphine
  • Contact
SCD Paris Dauphine - Place du Maréchal de Lattre de Tassigny 75775 Paris Cedex 16

 Content on this site is licensed under a Creative Commons 2.0 France (CC BY-NC-ND 2.0) license.