@inproceedings{JELIA2021,
Abstract = {A basic form of an instantiated argument is as a pair (support, conclusion) standing for a conditional relation `if support then conclusion'. When this relation is not fully conclusive, a natural choice is to model the argument strength with
natural choice for this measure is the conditional probability of the conclusion given the support.
In this paper, using a very simple language with conditionals, we explore a framework for probabilistic logic-based argumentation based on an extensive use of conditional probability, where uncertain and possibly inconsistent domain knowledge about a given scenario is represented as a set of defeasible rules quantified with conditional probabilities.
We then discuss corresponding notions of attack and defeat relations between arguments, providing a basis for appropriate acceptability semantics, e.g. based on extensions or on DeLP-style dialogical trees.
},
Author = {Pilar Dellunde and Llu\'is Godo and Amanda Vidal},
Booktitle = {JELIA 2021 Proceedings},
Publisher = {Springer},
Series = {Lecture Notes in Computer Science},
Title = {Probabilistic argumentation: an approach based on conditional probability -- a preliminary report--},
Year = {In Press},
}