In abstract argumentation, each argument is regarded as atomic. There is no internal structure to an argument. Also, there is no specification of what is an argument or an attack. They are assumed to be given. This abstract ...

Dung's argumentation frameworks have been applied for over twenty years to the analysis of argument justification. This representation focuses on arguments and the attacks among them, abstracting away from other features ...

This work introduces Extended Defeasible Logic Programming (E-DeLP), a structured argumentation system enabling the expression of reasons for and against using defeasible rules. E-DeLP extends the formalism of Defeasible ...

We propose a new family of abstract argumentation frameworks which we refer to as generalized (identified through the acronym GenAF), due to its ability of adapting to different representation languages. GenAFs are formalized ...

Argumentation frameworks often model dynamic situations where arguments and their relationships (e.g., attacks) frequently change over time. As a consequence, the sets of conclusions (e.g., extensions of abstract argumentation ...

Structured argumentation systems, and their implementation, represent an important research subject in the area of Knowledge Representation and Reasoning. Structured argumentation advances over abstract argumentation ...

The concept of explanation has received attention from different areas in Computer Science, particularly in the knowledge-based systems and expert systems communities. At the same time, argumentation has evolved as a new ...

Temporal Argumentation Frameworks (TAF) represent a recent extension of Dung's abstract argumentation frameworks that consider the temporal availability of arguments. In a TAF, arguments are valid during specific time ...