Stable Normative Explanations: From Argumentation to Deontic Logic
- URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2307.05156v1
- Date: Tue, 11 Jul 2023 10:26:05 GMT
- Title: Stable Normative Explanations: From Argumentation to Deontic Logic
- Authors: Cecilia Di Florio, Guido Governatori, Antonino Rotolo, Giovanni Sartor
- Abstract summary: This paper examines how a notion of stable explanation can be expressed in the context of formal argumentation.
We show how to build from argumentation neighborhood structures for deontic logic where this notion of explanation can be characterised.
- Score: 1.3272510644778104
- License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
- Abstract: This paper examines how a notion of stable explanation developed elsewhere in
Defeasible Logic can be expressed in the context of formal argumentation. With
this done, we discuss the deontic meaning of this reconstruction and show how
to build from argumentation neighborhood structures for deontic logic where
this notion of explanation can be characterised. Some direct complexity results
are offered.
Related papers
- Dialogue-based Explanations for Logical Reasoning using Structured Argumentation [0.06138671548064355]
We identify structural weaknesses of the state-of-the-art and propose a generic argumentation-based approach to address these problems.
Our work provides dialogue models as dialectic-proof procedures to compute and explain a query answer.
This allows us to construct dialectical proof trees as explanations, which are more expressive and arguably more intuitive than existing explanation formalisms.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2025-02-16T22:26:18Z) - An Encoding of Abstract Dialectical Frameworks into Higher-Order Logic [57.24311218570012]
This approach allows for the computer-assisted analysis of abstract dialectical frameworks.
Exemplary applications include the formal analysis and verification of meta-theoretical properties.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2023-12-08T09:32:26Z) - Formal Proofs as Structured Explanations: Proposing Several Tasks on Explainable Natural Language Inference [0.16317061277457]
We propose a reasoning framework that can model the reasoning process underlying natural language inferences.
The framework is based on the semantic tableau method, a well-studied proof system in formal logic.
We show how it can be used to define natural language reasoning tasks with structured explanations.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2023-11-15T01:24:09Z) - Abductive Commonsense Reasoning Exploiting Mutually Exclusive
Explanations [118.0818807474809]
Abductive reasoning aims to find plausible explanations for an event.
Existing approaches for abductive reasoning in natural language processing often rely on manually generated annotations for supervision.
This work proposes an approach for abductive commonsense reasoning that exploits the fact that only a subset of explanations is correct for a given context.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2023-05-24T01:35:10Z) - MetaLogic: Logical Reasoning Explanations with Fine-Grained Structure [129.8481568648651]
We propose a benchmark to investigate models' logical reasoning capabilities in complex real-life scenarios.
Based on the multi-hop chain of reasoning, the explanation form includes three main components.
We evaluate the current best models' performance on this new explanation form.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2022-10-22T16:01:13Z) - A Formalisation of Abstract Argumentation in Higher-Order Logic [77.34726150561087]
We present an approach for representing abstract argumentation frameworks based on an encoding into classical higher-order logic.
This provides a uniform framework for computer-assisted assessment of abstract argumentation frameworks using interactive and automated reasoning tools.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2021-10-18T10:45:59Z) - Exploring Discourse Structures for Argument Impact Classification [48.909640432326654]
This paper empirically shows that the discourse relations between two arguments along the context path are essential factors for identifying the persuasive power of an argument.
We propose DisCOC to inject and fuse the sentence-level structural information with contextualized features derived from large-scale language models.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2021-06-02T06:49:19Z) - A Description Logic for Analogical Reasoning [28.259681405091666]
We present a mechanism to infer plausible missing knowledge, which relies on reasoning by analogy.
This is the first paper that studies analog reasoning within the setting of description logic.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2021-05-10T19:06:07Z) - Stability in Abstract Argumentation [2.375764121997739]
We show how the notion of stability can be translated into reasoning with Argument-Incomplete AFs.
We illustrate to what extent this notion can be useful with an application to argument-based negotiation.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2020-12-23T10:34:38Z) - Thinking About Causation: A Causal Language with Epistemic Operators [58.720142291102135]
We extend the notion of a causal model with a representation of the state of an agent.
On the side of the object language, we add operators to express knowledge and the act of observing new information.
We provide a sound and complete axiomatization of the logic, and discuss the relation of this framework to causal team semantics.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2020-10-30T12:16:45Z)
This list is automatically generated from the titles and abstracts of the papers in this site.
This site does not guarantee the quality of this site (including all information) and is not responsible for any consequences.