argument map
Guided Reasoning: A Non-Technical Introduction
We introduce the concept and a default implementation of Guided Reasoning. A multi-agent system is a Guided Reasoning system iff one agent (the guide) primarily interacts with other agents in order to improve reasoning quality. We describe Logikon's default implementation of Guided Reasoning in non-technical terms. This is a living document we'll gradually enrich with more detailed information and examples.
- Europe > Italy > Tuscany > Florence (0.04)
- Europe > Germany > Baden-Württemberg > Stuttgart Region > Stuttgart (0.04)
- Workflow (0.52)
- Research Report (0.42)
Understanding Enthymemes in Argument Maps: Bridging Argument Mining and Logic-based Argumentation
Ben-Naim, Jonathan, David, Victor, Hunter, Anthony
Argument mining is natural language processing technology aimed at identifying arguments in text. Furthermore, the approach is being developed to identify the premises and claims of those arguments, and to identify the relationships between arguments including support and attack relationships. In this paper, we assume that an argument map contains the premises and claims of arguments, and support and attack relationships between them, that have been identified by argument mining. So from a piece of text, we assume an argument map is obtained automatically by natural language processing. However, to understand and to automatically analyse that argument map, it would be desirable to instantiate that argument map with logical arguments. Once we have the logical representation of the arguments in an argument map, we can use automated reasoning to analyze the argumentation (e.g. check consistency of premises, check validity of claims, and check the labelling on each arc corresponds with thw logical arguments). We address this need by using classical logic for representing the explicit information in the text, and using default logic for representing the implicit information in the text. In order to investigate our proposal, we consider some specific options for instantiation.
- North America > United States > California > Santa Clara County > Stanford (0.04)
- North America > Canada > Quebec > Montreal (0.04)
- Europe > United Kingdom > England > Greater London > London (0.04)
- (3 more...)
Heuristic Algorithms for the Approximation of Mutual Coherence
Betz, Gregor, Chekan, Vera, Mchedlidze, Tamara
Mutual coherence is a measure of similarity between two opinions. Although the notion comes from philosophy, it is essential for a wide range of technologies, e.g., the Wahl-O-Mat system. In Germany, this system helps voters to find candidates that are the closest to their political preferences. The exact computation of mutual coherence is highly time-consuming due to the iteration over all subsets of an opinion. Moreover, for every subset, an instance of the SAT model counting problem has to be solved which is known to be a hard problem in computer science. This work is the first study to accelerate this computation. We model the distribution of the so-called confirmation values as a mixture of three Gaussians and present efficient heuristics to estimate its model parameters. The mutual coherence is then approximated with the expected value of the distribution. Some of the presented algorithms are fully polynomial-time, others only require solving a small number of instances of the SAT model counting problem. The average squared error of our best algorithm lies below 0.0035 which is insignificant if the efficiency is taken into account. Furthermore, the accuracy is precise enough to be used in Wahl-O-Mat-like systems.
- Europe > Germany > Baden-Württemberg > Karlsruhe Region > Karlsruhe (0.04)
- Europe > Netherlands (0.04)
- Europe > Germany > Berlin (0.04)
Trichotomic Argumentation Representation
Göttlinger, Merlin, Schröder, Lutz
The Aristotelian trichotomy distinguishes three aspects of argumentation: Logos, Ethos, and Pathos. Even rich argumentation representations like the Argument Interchange Format (AIF) are only concerned with capturing the Logos aspect. Inference Anchoring Theory (IAT) adds the possibility to represent ethical requirements on the illocutionary force edges linking locutions to illocutions, thereby allowing to capture some aspects of ethos. With the recent extensions AIF+ and Social Argument Interchange Format (S-AIF), which embed dialogue and speakers into the AIF argumentation representation, the basis for representing all three aspects identified by Aristotle was formed. In the present work, we develop the Trichotomic Argument Interchange Format (T-AIF), building on the idea from S-AIF of adding the speakers to the argumentation graph. We capture Logos in the usual known from AIF+, Ethos in form of weighted edges between actors representing trust, and Pathos via weighted edges from actors to illocutions representing their level of commitment to the propositions. This extended structured argumentation representation opens up new possibilities of defining semantic properties on this rich graph in order to characterize and profile the reasoning patterns of the participating actors.
- Europe > United Kingdom > England > Cambridgeshire > Cambridge (0.04)
- Europe > Norway (0.04)
- North America > United States > New York (0.04)
- Europe > Germany > Bavaria > Middle Franconia > Nuremberg (0.04)