A deontic argumentation framework towards doctrine reification
License
Cadmus Permanent Link
Full-text via DOI
ISBN
ISSN
2055-3706; 2055-3714
Issue Date
Type of Publication
Keyword(s)
LC Subject Heading
Other Topic(s)
EUI Research Cluster(s)
Initial version
Published version
Succeeding version
Preceding version
Published version part
Earlier different version
Initial format
Author(s)
Citation
Journal of applied logics, 2019, Vol. 6, No. 5, pp. 903-939
Cite
RIVERET, Régis, ROTOLO, Antonino, SARTOR, Giovanni, A deontic argumentation framework towards doctrine reification, Journal of applied logics, 2019, Vol. 6, No. 5, pp. 903-939 - https://hdl.handle.net/1814/70278
Abstract
A modular rule-based argumentation system is proposed to represent and reason upon conditional norms featuring obligations, prohibitions, and (strong or weak) permissions. The approach is based on common constructs in computational models of argument: rule-based arguments, argumentation graphs, argument labelling semantics and statement labelling semantics. Deontic reasoning patterns are captured with defeasible rule schemata to the greatest extent, towards the reification of doctrinal pieces. We show then that bivalent statement labelling s can fall short to address normative completeness, and for this reason, we propose to use trivalent labelling semantics. Given an argumentation graph, deontic statuses can be computed efficiently. The system is illustrated with a scenario featuring a violation and a contrary-to-duty obligation.
Table of Contents
Additional Information
First published online: 31 August 2019