On Construction and Evaluation of Analogical Arguments for Persuasive Reasoning
On Construction and Evaluation of Analogical Arguments for Persuasive Reasoning
复制标题
论说服性推理的类比论证的构建和评估
DOI：
10.1080/08839514.2019.1646026
复制
发表时间：
2019
影响因子：
2.8
通讯作者：
P. Boonkwan
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Teeradaj Racharak;S. Tojo;Nguyen Duy Hung;P. Boonkwan
摘要类比推理是一个复杂的过程，基于两对概念或事件状态之间的比较(又名。源和目标)用于从一个到另一个来表征某些特征。使用这一过程来支持他们的主张的论点称为类比论点。我们的目标是根据论证理论来研究其结构和失效的计算。我们提出的具有谓词相似度的基于假设的论证ABA(P)框架可以看作是基于假设的论证框架(ABA)的扩展，在该框架中不仅可以使用假设，而且可以利用谓词的相似性来支持主张。ABA(P)对每一棵参数树进行相似度标注，并针对智能体推理中易受轻信/怀疑的特点，研究了不同的数值聚合方法。对类比论证的可接受性进行了评估。抽象论证的语义学。最后，我们证明了ABA(P)从类比中捕获了用于论证的论证方案，并在用于说服时提供了解释。
ABSTRACT Analogical reasoning is a complex process based on a comparison between two pairs of concepts or states of affairs (aka. the source and the target) for characterizing certain features from one to another. Arguments which employ this process to support their claims are called analogical arguments. Our goals are to study the structure and the computation for their defeasibility in light of the argumentation theory. Our proposed assumption-based argumentation with predicate similarity ABA(p) framework can be seen as an extension of assumption-based argumentation framework (ABA), in which not only assumptions can be used but also similarity of predicates is used to support a claim. ABA (p) labels each argument tree with an analogical degree and different ways to aggregate numerical values are studied toward gullible/skeptical characteristics in agent reasoning. The acceptability of analogical arguments is evaluated w.r.t. the semantics of abstract argumentation. Finally, we demonstrate that ABA (p) captures the argumentation scheme for argument from analogy and provides an explanation when it is used for persuasion.