Argumentation as a General Framework for Uncertain Reasoning
John Fox, Paul J. Krause, Morten Elvang-G{\o}ransson

TL;DR
This paper presents a unified argumentation framework for uncertain reasoning, modeling arguments with labels for grounds and confidence, and demonstrating its applicability across various uncertainty calculi.
Contribution
It introduces a generalized argumentation system based on minimal logic, enabling aggregation of arguments and unifying different uncertainty methods.
Findings
Provides a formal model for argument-based uncertain reasoning
Shows how various uncertainty calculi can be represented within this framework
Demonstrates aggregation of arguments using numeric and symbolic functions
Abstract
Argumentation is the process of constructing arguments about propositions, and the assignment of statements of confidence to those propositions based on the nature and relative strength of their supporting arguments. The process is modelled as a labelled deductive system, in which propositions are doubly labelled with the grounds on which they are based and a representation of the confidence attached to the argument. Argument construction is captured by a generalized argument consequence relation based on the ^,--fragment of minimal logic. Arguments can be aggregated by a variety of numeric and symbolic flattening functions. This approach appears to shed light on the common logical structure of a variety of quantitative, qualitative and defeasible uncertainty calculi.
Peer Reviews
No public reviews on file for this paper yet. If you reviewed it on a platform where reviews are public (OpenReview, ICLR, NeurIPS, ICML), you can paste yours below so the community can read it here.
Videos
No videos yet. Explain this paper in a talk, walkthrough, or lecture? Add one.
Taxonomy
TopicsLogic, Reasoning, and Knowledge · Advanced Algebra and Logic · Rough Sets and Fuzzy Logic
