Haskell gets argumentative

3Citations
Citations of this article
7Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.
Get full text

Abstract

Argumentation theory is an interdisciplinary field studying how conclusions can be reached through logical reasoning. The notion of argument is completely general, including for example legal arguments, scientific arguments, and political arguments. Computational argumentation theory is studied in the context of artificial intelligence, and a number of computational argumentation frameworks have been put forward to date. However, there is a lack of concrete, high level realisations of these frameworks, which hampers research and applications at a number of levels. We hypothesise that the lack of suitable domain-specific languages in which to formalise argumentation frameworks is a contributing factor. In this paper, we present a formalisation of a particular computational argumentation framework, Carneades, as a case study with a view to investigate the extent to which functional languages are useful as a means to realising computational argumentation frameworks and reason about them. © 2013 Springer-Verlag.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Van Gijzel, B., & Nilsson, H. (2013). Haskell gets argumentative. In Lecture Notes in Computer Science (including subseries Lecture Notes in Artificial Intelligence and Lecture Notes in Bioinformatics) (Vol. 7829 LNCS, pp. 215–230). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-40447-4_14

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free