More Web Proxy on the site http://driver.im/

research-article

Factual argumentation—a core model for assertions making

Authors:

Athina Kritsotaki,

Katerina BoutsikaAuthors Info & Claims

Journal on Computing and Cultural Heritage (JOCCH), Volume 3, Issue 3

Article No.: 8, Pages 1 - 34

https://doi.org/10.1145/1921614.1921615

Published: 11 February 2011 Publication History

Abstract

Modeling human argumentation should shed light on how knowledge described in information systems could be better accessed, structured, and used for real life research purposes. Current argumentation models are either not analytical enough or restricted to formal logic. For that purpose, we seek a model of human argumentation in which reasoning may not only consist of falsification or verification but more generally of strengthening or weakening hypotheses, and a way to connect this model to an ontology of the domain of discourse. We have studied examples of factual argumentation in empirical research in archaeology. Based on this and other empirical material, we propose an innovative integrated model of factual argumentation that includes evolution, composition, and revision of arguments. It makes explicit both the processes of argument-making and the states of belief at a particular point in time in a composite inference, and connects explicitly to a domain ontology, free of tacit background knowledge. We have implemented the model in a more restricted form and tested it with published archaeological examples. Future work may generalize the model to other kinds of argumentation.

References

[1]

Aussenac-Gilles, N. 2006. Ontology or meta-model for retrieving scientific reasoning in documents: The Arkeotek project. In Proceedings of the Workshop on Exploring the Limits of Global Models for Integration and use of Historical and Scientific Information.

[2]

Bayliss, A. and Ramsey, C. B. 2004. Pragmatic Bayesians: A decade of integrating radiocarbon dates into chronological models. In Tools for Constructing Chronologies: Crossing Disciplinary Boundaries, Lecture Notes in Statistics, Vol. 177, 25--45.

[3]

Bekiari, C. and Doerr, M. 1999. Documentation and reasoning on parts and potential wholes. In Proceedings of the International Conference on Computer Applications and Quantitative Methods in Archaeology, (CAA).

[4]

Boutsika, K. 2010. Computer supported collaborative factual argumentation and conflict resolution. Masters of Science Thesis, Department of Computer Science, University of Crete.

[5]

Chesnevar, C., McGinnis, J., Modgil, S., Rahwan, I., Reed, C., Simari, G., South, M., Vreeswijk, G., and Willmott, S. 2006. Towards an argument interchange format. Knowl. Eng. Rev. 21, 4, 293--316.

Digital Library

[6]

Crofts, N., Doerr, M., Gill, T., Stead, S., and Stiff, M. 2008. Definition of the CIDOC conceptual reference model. http://cidoc.ics.forth.gr/docs/cidoc_crm_version_4.2.5a.doc.

[7]

Doerr, M., Plexousakis D., and Bekiari, C. 2001. A metamodel for part-whole relationships for reasoning on missing parts and reconstruction. In Proceedings of the 20th International Conference on Conceptual Modeling. Springer Verlag, Berlin, Lecture Notes in Computer Science, Vol. 2224, 412--425.

Digital Library

[8]

Doerr, M., Plexousakis, D., Kopaka, K., and Bekiari, C. 2004. Supporting chronological reasoning in archaeology. In Proceedings of the International Conference on Computer Applications and Quantitative Methods in Archaeology (CAA).

[9]

Fauconnier, G. and Turner, M. 2002. The Way We Think: Conceptual Blending and the Mind's Hidden Complexities. Basic Books, New York, NY.

[10]

Feyerabend, P. 1993. Against Method, 3rd Ed. Verso. ISBN: 0860916464.

[11]

Gangemi, A., Guarino, N., Masolo, C., Oltramari A., and Schneider, L. 2002. Sweetening ontologies with DOLCE. In Proceedings of the 13th International Conference, on Knowledge Engineering and Knowledge Management (EKAW). Lecture Notes in Artificial Intelligence, Vol. 2473, 166--181.

Digital Library

[12]

Gardin, J-CL. 1990. The structure of archaeologicaltheories. In Studies in Modern Archaeology Vol 3. Mathematics and Information Science in Archaeology: A Flexible Framework. Bonn, 7--25.

[13]

Gardin, J-CL. 2002. Archaeological discourse, conceptual modelling and digitalisation: An interim report of the logicist program. In Proceedings of the International Conference on Computer Applications and Quantitative Methods in Archaeology (CAA).

[14]

Gardin, J-CL. and Roux, V. 2004. The Arkeotek project: A European network of knowledge bases in the archaeology of techniques. Archeologia e Calcolatori 15, 25--40.

[15]

Gelbert, A. 2003. Traditions céramiques et emprunts techniques dans la vallée du fleuve Sénégal. Éditions de la Maison des sciences de l'homme. Éditions Épistèmes, Paris.

[16]

Gettier, E. 1963. ‘Is justified true belief knowledge&quest; Analysis. 23, 121--123.

[17]

Gordon T.F and Karacapilidis, N. 1997. The Zeno argumentation framework. In Proceedings of the 6th International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Law. ACM Press.

Digital Library

[18]

Governatori, G., Maher, M. J., Antoniou G., and Billington, D. 2004. Argumentation semantics for defeasible logic. J. Logic Comput, 14, 5, 675--702.

Digital Library

[19]

Guarino, N. 1998. Formal ontology in information systems. In Proceedings of the International Conference of Formal Ontology in Information Systems (FOIS’98). IOS Press, 3--15.

[20]

Guizzardi, G., Herre, H., and Wagner, G. 2002: On the general ontological foundations of conceptual modeling. In Proceedings of the 21th International Conference on Conceptual Modeling (ER'02). Springer-Verlag, Berlin. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, Vol. 2503, 65--78.

Digital Library

[21]

Hodder, I. 1992. Theory and Practice in Archaeology. Routledge, UK.

[22]

Hodder, I. 1999. The Archaeological Process: AnIntroduction. Blackwell Publishers, Oxford, UK.

[23]

Hunter, A. 2004. Towards higher impact argumentation. In Proceedings of the 19th American National Conference on Artificial Intelligence (AAAI'04). MIT Press, 275--280.

Digital Library

[24]

Kotis, K., Vouros, G. A., and Alonso, J. P. 2004. HCOME: Tool-supported methodology for collaboratively devising living ontologies. In Proceedings of the 2nd International Workshop on Semantic Web and Databases (SWDB), (Co-located with VLDB). Springer-Verlag.

Digital Library

[25]

Kunz, W. and Rittel, H. W. J. 1970. Issues as elements of information systems. Working Paper 131, Institute of Urban and Regional Development, University of California.

[26]

Lewis, C. T. and Short, C. 1879. A Latin Dictionary. Revised, Ed. Clarendon Press. http://www.perseus.tufts.edu/hopper/text?doc=Perseus:text:1999.04.0059.

[27]

Parsons, T. 1996. What is an Argument&quest; J. Philos. 93, 4, 164--185.

[28]

Pinto, H. S., Staab, S., and Tempich, C. 2004. DILIGENT: Towards a fine-grained methodology for distributed, loosely-controlled and evolving engineering of ontologies. In Proceedings of the 16th European Conference on Artificial Intelligence (ECAI). IOS Press.

[29]

Prakken, H. 1995. From logic to dialectics in legal argument. In Proceedings of the 5th International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Law. ACM Press, 165--174.

Digital Library

[30]

Rahwan, I., Zablith, F., and Reed, C. 2007. Laying the foundations for a world wide argument web. Artif. Intell. 171, 10--15, 897--921.

Digital Library

[31]

Rowe, G., Macagno, F., Reed C., and Walton, D. 2006. Araucaria as a tool for diagramming arguments in teaching and studying philsophy. Teac. Philosophy, 29, 2, 111--124.

[32]

Selvin, A., Buckingham Shum, S., Sierhuis, M., Conklin, J., Zimmermann, B., Palus, C., Drath, W., Horth, D., Domingue, J., Motta, E., and Li, G. 2001. Compendium: Making Meetings into Knowledge Events. In Knowledge Technologies, Austin, TX.

[33]

Serres, M. 2010. Les nouvelles technologies, que nous apportent-elles&quest;. http://interstices.info/jcms/c_15918/les-nouvelles-technologies-que-nous-apportent-elles.

[34]

Shum, S. B., Motta, E., and Domingue, J. 1999. Representing scholarly claims in internet digital libraries: A knowledge modelling approach. In Proceedings of the 3rd European Conference on Research and Advanced Technology for Digital Libraries (ECDL). Paris.

Digital Library

[35]

Sowa, J. 2000. Knowledge Representation: Logical, Philosophical, and Computational Foundations. Brook/Cole, Pacific Grove, CA.

Digital Library

[36]

Steup, M. 2005. Epistemology. Stanford Encyclopediaof Philosophy. Stanford University.

[37]

Tempich, C., Pinto, H. S., Sure, Y., and Staab, S. 2005. An argumentation ontology for distributed, loosely-controlled and evolving Engineering processes of ontologies (DILIGENT). In Proceedings of the 2nd European Semantic Web Conference, (ESWC). Lecture Notes Computer Science, Vol. 3532, Springer-Verlag.

Digital Library

[38]

Toulmin, S. 1958. The Uses of Argument. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

[39]

Van Gelder, T. J. 2002. Argument mapping with Reason&excl;Able. Amer. Philos. Assoc. Newsletter Philos. Computs. 85--90.

[40]

Verheij, B. 1996. Rules, reasons, arguments. Formal studies of argumentation and defeat. Dissertation, Maastricht: Universiteit Maastricht. http://www.metajur.unimaas.nl/~bart/proefschrift/.

[41]

Verheij, B. 1998. ArguMed: A template argument mediation system for lawyers. In Proceedings of the 11th Conference on Legal Knowledge-Based Systems (JURIX), 113--130. Gerard Noodt Instituut, Nijmegen.

[42]

Verheij, B. 2001. Evaluating arguments based on Toulmin's scheme. In Proceedings of OSSA'01: Argumentation and its Applications. The Ontario Society for the Study of Argumentation.

[43]

Verheij, B. 2005. An argumentation core ontology as the centerpiece of a myriad of argumentation formats. Input Agentlink Argumentation Interchange Format Technical Forum.

[44]

Wiśniewski, A. 1991. Erotetic arguments: A preliminary analysis. Studia Logica 50, 2, 261--274.

[45]

Wiśniewski, A. 2001. Questions and inferences.Logique et Analyse 44, 173--175, 5--43.

[46]

Wittgenstein, L. 1984. Philosophische Untersuchungen. Werkausgabe, Band 1, Suhrkamp Taschenbuch, Frankfurt.

[47]

Wylie, A. 1994. Evidential constraints: pragmatic objectivism in archaeology. In Readings in the Philosophy of Social Science, Michael Martin and Lee McIntyre Eds., MIT Press, Cambridge MA, 747--765.

Cited By

Gonzalez-Perez CPereira-Fariña MCalderón-Cerrato BMartín-Rodilla P(2024)IAT/ML: a metamodel and modelling approach for discourse analysisSoftware and Systems Modeling (SoSyM)10.1007/s10270-024-01208-723:5(1157-1181)Online publication date: 1-Oct-2024
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1007/s10270-024-01208-7
Murano FQuochi VDel Grosso ARigobianco LZinzi M(2023)Describing Inscriptions of Ancient Italy. The ItAnt Project and Its Information Encoding ProcessJournal on Computing and Cultural Heritage 10.1145/360670316:3(1-14)Online publication date: 9-Aug-2023
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3606703
Suissa OZhitomirsky-geffet MElmalech A(2023)Around the GLOBE: Numerical Aggregation Question-answering on Heterogeneous Genealogical Knowledge Graphs with Deep Neural NetworksJournal on Computing and Cultural Heritage 10.1145/358608116:3(1-24)Online publication date: 9-Aug-2023
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3586081
Show More Cited By

Index Terms

Recommendations

Twelve theses on argumentation systems

In this article we consider the partition of a set of statements P = P ^a P ^b P , where P ^a, P ^b, P are, correspondingly, sets of statements only being argumented, both being argumented and argumenting, and only argumenting (...
Argumentation Systems

Argumentation systems are useful instruments for decision support when the arguments are changed dynamically in dependence of the users and the situation. In argumentation systems different strategies are used when the system prepares the argumentation ...
The Profile of Scientific Argumentation Skill Student's Using "Toulmin Argumentation Pattern" Analysis in the Solving Energy Problem on The Students of Class VII
ICEIT 2019: Proceedings of the 2019 8th International Conference on Educational and Information Technology

Scientific argumentation skill student's in the solving energy problem is very importent in the life of the 21st century. Therefore, the purpose of this study is to explore the profile of scientific argumentation skill student's using Toulmin ...

Comments

Please enable JavaScript to view thecomments powered by Disqus.

Information & Contributors

Information

Published In

cover image Journal on Computing and Cultural Heritage

Journal on Computing and Cultural Heritage Volume 3, Issue 3

March 2011

127 pages

ISSN:1556-4673

EISSN:1556-4711

DOI:10.1145/1921614

Issue’s Table of Contents

Copyright © 2011 ACM.

Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for components of this work owned by others than ACM must be honored. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee. Request permissions from [email protected]

Publisher

Association for Computing Machinery

New York, NY, United States

Publication History

Published: 11 February 2011

Accepted: 01 October 2010

Revised: 01 October 2010

Received: 01 June 2010

Published in JOCCH Volume 3, Issue 3

Permissions

Request permissions for this article.

Request Permissions

Check for updates

Author Tags

Qualifiers

Research-article
Research
Refereed

Contributors

Other Metrics

View Article Metrics

Bibliometrics & Citations

Bibliometrics

Article Metrics

20
Total Citations
View Citations
729
Total Downloads

Downloads (Last 12 months)16
Downloads (Last 6 weeks)3

Reflects downloads up to 11 Dec 2024

Other Metrics

View Author Metrics

Citations

Cited By

Gonzalez-Perez CPereira-Fariña MCalderón-Cerrato BMartín-Rodilla P(2024)IAT/ML: a metamodel and modelling approach for discourse analysisSoftware and Systems Modeling (SoSyM)10.1007/s10270-024-01208-723:5(1157-1181)Online publication date: 1-Oct-2024
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1007/s10270-024-01208-7
Murano FQuochi VDel Grosso ARigobianco LZinzi M(2023)Describing Inscriptions of Ancient Italy. The ItAnt Project and Its Information Encoding ProcessJournal on Computing and Cultural Heritage 10.1145/360670316:3(1-14)Online publication date: 9-Aug-2023
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3606703
Suissa OZhitomirsky-geffet MElmalech A(2023)Around the GLOBE: Numerical Aggregation Question-answering on Heterogeneous Genealogical Knowledge Graphs with Deep Neural NetworksJournal on Computing and Cultural Heritage 10.1145/358608116:3(1-24)Online publication date: 9-Aug-2023
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3586081
Fafalios PKritsotaki ADoerr M(2023)The SeaLiT Ontology – An Extension of CIDOC-CRM for the Modeling and Integration of Maritime History InformationJournal on Computing and Cultural Heritage 10.1145/358608016:3(1-21)Online publication date: 9-Aug-2023
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3586080
Maćkowski MBrzoza PKawulok MMeisel RSpinczyk D(2023)Multimodal Presentation of Interactive Audio-Tactile Graphics Supporting the Perception of Visual Information by Blind PeopleACM Transactions on Multimedia Computing, Communications, and Applications10.1145/358607619:5s(1-22)Online publication date: 7-Jun-2023
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3586076
Xie TGai KZhu LWang SZhang Z(2023)RAC-Chain: An Asynchronous Consensus-based Cross-chain Approach to Scalable Blockchain for MetaverseACM Transactions on Multimedia Computing, Communications, and Applications10.1145/3586011Online publication date: 2-Mar-2023
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3586011
Mc Donnell NDuggan JHowley E(2023)A Genetic Programming-based Framework for Semi-automated Multi-agent Systems EngineeringACM Transactions on Autonomous and Adaptive Systems10.1145/358473118:2(1-30)Online publication date: 28-May-2023
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3584731
Câmara Ade Almeida AOliveira J(2023)Versioning: Representing Cultural Heritage Evidences on CIDOC-CRM via a Case StudyProceedings of International Conference on Information Technology and Applications10.1007/978-981-19-9331-2_31(363-371)Online publication date: 19-May-2023
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-19-9331-2_31
Gonzalez-Perez CPereira-Fariña MMartín-Rodilla P(2023)IAT/ML: A Domain-Specific Approach for Discourse Analysis and ProcessingEnterprise, Business-Process and Information Systems Modeling10.1007/978-3-031-34241-7_14(199-213)Online publication date: 31-May-2023
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-34241-7_14
Schneider PJones JHiltmann TKauppinen T(2021)Challenge-derived design practices for a semantic gazetteer for medieval and early modern placesSemantic Web10.3233/SW-20039412:3(493-515)Online publication date: 1-Jan-2021
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.3233/SW-200394
Show More Cited By

View Options

Login options

Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.

Full Access

Get this Article

View options

PDF

View or Download as a PDF file.

eReader

View online with eReader.

Media

Figures

Other

Tables

View Issue’s Table of Contents