Our research group has published over 40 papers since we get funded by the Alexander von Humboldt-Foundation in September 2014.

## 2019

• Jared Millson and Christian Straßer,
A Logic for Best Explanations,
Journal of Applied Non-Classical Logics, 2019

• Jesse Heyninck and Christian Straßer,
A fully rational argumentation system for preordered defeasible rulesc,
AAMAS 2019 (full paper, acceptance rate: 24%).

Structured argumentation is a family of formal approaches for the handling of defeasible, potentially inconsistent information. Many models for structured argumentation distinguish between strict and defeasible inference rules. Defeasible rules often come with varying degrees of strength which is formally represented by a preorder over the defeasible rules. Various lifting principles have been presented in the literature to determine the relative strength of an argument by considering the strength of the defeasible rules used in its construction. The strength of arguments then comes into play when determining whether an attack (a purely syntactic relationship between arguments) results in a defeat (i.e. a successful attack). In \cite{caminada2007evaluation,Wu-Phd}, several rationality postulates were proposed that serve as a measure to assess the normative rationality of structured argumentation formalisms. In \cite{heyninck2017revisiting}, the first formalism satisfying all rationality postulates for structured argumentation when taking into account totally ordered defeasible rules was proposed. In many settings, assuming a total order greatly limits the realistic modelling capabilities of a formal system, e.g. when agents do not know the actual preferences of each rule or since different agents have different preferences over defeasible rules. Our paper shows that in the more general setting of preorders, violations of several rationality postulates can occur. We show how for a wide class of lifting principles, these violations can be avoided, resulting in the first Dung-based system that satisfies all four rationality postulates for preordered defeasible rule bases.

• Jesse Heyninck,
Investigations into the logical foundations of defeasible reasoning: an Argumentative Perspective,
PhD thesis, Ruhr-University Bochum, 2019 (summa cum laude)

• Jesse Heyninck and Ofer Arieli,
Simple Contrapositive Assumption-Based Argumentation Frameworks,
AAMAS 2019 (extended abstract)

• Ofer Arieli and Christian Straßer,
Logical Argumentation by Dynamic Proof Systems,
Theoretical Computer Science, 2019

In this paper we provide a proof theoretical investigation of logical argumentation, where arguments are represented by sequents, conflicts between arguments are represented by sequent elimination rules, and deductions are made by dynamic proof systems extending standard sequent calculi. The idea is to imitate argumentative movements in which certain claims are introduced or withdrawn in the presence of counter-claims. This is done by a dynamic evaluation of sequences of sequents, in which the latter are considered derived’ or not derived’ according to the content of the sequence. We show that decisive conclusions of such a process correspond to well-accepted consequences of the underlying argumentation framework. The outcome is therefore a general and modular proof-theoretical approach for paraconsistent and non-monotonic reasoning with argumentation systems.

• AnneMarie Borg, Daniel Frey, Dunja Seselja, and Christian Straßer,
Theory-Choice, Transient Diversity and the Efficiency of Scientific Inquiry,
European Journal of Philosophy of Science, 2019

Recent studies of scientific interaction based on agent-based models (ABMs) suggest that a crucial factor conducive to efficient inquiry is what \cite{zollman2010epistemic} has dubbed `transient diversity’. It signifies a process in which a community engages in parallel exploration of rivaling theories lasting sufficiently long for the community to identify the best theory and to converge on it. But what exactly generates transient diversity? And is transient diversity a decisive factor when it comes to the efficiency of inquiry? In this paper we examine the impact of different conditions on the efficiency of inquiry, as well as the relation between diversity and efficiency. This includes certain diversity-generating mechanisms previously proposed in the literature (such as different social networks and cautious decision-making), as well as some factors that have so far been neglected (such as evaluations underlying theory-choice performed by scientists).

This study is obtained via an argumentation-based ABM (\cite{ArgABM-HSR,ABM-Lori}). Our results suggest that cautious decision-making does not always have a significant impact on the efficiency of inquiry while different evaluations underlying theory-choice and different social networks do. Moreover, we find a correlation between diversity and a successful performance of agents only under specific conditions, which indicates that transient diversity is sometimes not the primary factor responsible for efficiency. Altogether, when comparing our results to those obtained by structurally different ABMs based on Zollman’s work, the impact of specific factors on efficiency of inquiry, as well as the role of transient diversity in achieving efficiency, appear to be highly dependent on the underlying model.

• H. van Ditmarsch, M. Gattinger, L. B. Kuijer and P. Pardo,
Strengthening Gossip Protocols using Protocol-Dependent Knowledge,
Journal of Applied Logics - IFCoLog Journal of Logics and their Applications 6(1), 2019

• AnneMarie Borg, Ofer Arieli and Christian Straßer,
Reasoning with maximal consistency by argumentative approaches,
Journal of Logic and Computation, forthcoming.

## 2018

• Jesse Heyninck,
Relations between Assumption-Based approaches in nonmonotonic logic and formal argumentation: from Structured Argumentation to Adaptive Logics
accepted for the Journal of Applied Logic special issue for IsraLog’2017

• Mathieu Beirlaen, Jesse Heyninck, and Christian Straßer,
A critical assessment of Pollock’s work on logic-based argumentation with suppositions,
NMR 2018.

• H. van Ditmarsch, J. van Eijck, P. Pardo, R. Ramezanian and F. Schwarzentruber
Dynamic Gossip,
Bulletin of the Iranian Mathematical Society, Springer

• Mathieu Beirlaen, Jesse Heyninck, Pere Pardo, Christian Straßer,
Argument Strength in Formal Argumentation,
IFCOLOG, 5(1), pp. 629–676

• Mathieu Beirlaen, Jesse Heyninck, and Christian Straßer,
A Critical Assessment of Pollock’s Accounts of Suppositional Argumentation,

COMMA 2018

• AnneMarie Borg,
Equipping sequent-based argumentation,

COMMA 2018

• AnneMarie Borg and Christian Straßer,
Relevance and Contamination in Structured Argumentation,

IJCAI 2018 (acceptance rate 20%)

• P. Pardo, E. Sarrión-Morillo, F. Soler-Toscano and F. R. Velázquez-Quesada,
Tuning the program transformers from LCC to PDL

Journal of Applied Logics (IfColog Journal of Logics and their Applications) 5(1) pp.71-96

• Jesse Heyninck and Christian Straßer,
A Comparative Study of Assumption-Based Approaches to Reasoning with Priorities,

Second Chinese Conference on Logic and Argumentation.

• Jesse Heyninck and Ofer Arieli,
On the Semantics of Simple Contrapositive Assumption-Based Argumentation Frameworks
Second Chinese Conference on Logic and Argumentation.

• AnneMarie Borg, Ofer Arieli and Christian Straßer,
Hypersequent-based Argumentation: An Instantiation in the Relevance Logic RM.
In: Theory and Applications of Formal Argumentation 2017. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol 10757. Springer.

• AnneMarie Borg, Ofer Arieli,
Hypersequential Argumentation Frameworks: An Instantiation in the Modal Logic S5,
AAMAS 2018 (acceptance rate 25%).

• Ofer Arieli, AnneMarie Borg, Christian Straßer,
Prioritized Sequent-Based Argumentation
AAMAS 2018 (acceptance rate 25%).

• Daniel Frey and Dunja Šešelja,
Robustness and Idealizations in Agent-Based Models of Scientific Interaction,
British Journal for the Philosophy of Science.

• Daniel Frey and Dunja Šešelja,
What is the Epistemic Function of Highly Idealized Agent-Based Models of Scientific Inquiry?,
Philosophy of the Social Sciences.

## 2017

• Jesse Heyninck, Pere Pardo, Christian Straßer,
Assumption-Based Approaches to Reasoning with Priorities,
Proceedings of AI3.

• Dunja Seselja,
Scientific Pluralism and Inconsistency Toleration,
Humana Menta, Issue 32, 2017 link

In this paper I examine the problem of inconsistency toleration in the context of scientific pluralism. I argue that, first of all, the notion of in consistency toleration has to be qualified with respect to the evaluative attitude that one takes towards a given scientific theory or theories. Second, I show which types of inconsistency toleration are compatible with two major approaches to scientific pluralism, the so-called modest and the radical one. In view of this I suggest some points of demarcation between these two approaches.

• AnneMarie Borg, Daniel Frey, Dunja Seselja, and Christian Straßer,
Epistemic effects of scientific interaction: approaching the question with an argumentative agent-based model,
special issue on “Agent Based Modelling across Social Science, Economics, and Philosophy” in Historical Social Research.

• Mathieu Beirlaen,
Combining Inductive Generalization and Factual Abduction,

The aim of this paper is to outline a first-order model for ampliative reasoning that fruitfully combines the inference patterns of inductive generalization and factual abduction. The pattern of inductive generalization is the archetype pattern of inductive inference by which we arrive at a universally quantified statement (All Ps are Q) given one or more instances (Some Ps are Q). In factual abduction, we reason from a universally quantified statement (All Ps are Q) and an instance of its consequent (object a is Q) to an instance of its antecedent (object a is P). It is shown how these patterns can be combined in such a way that inductively inferred generalizations can be used as premises in abductive inferences, and that conclusions of abductive inferences in turn can be used to inductively infer new generalizations. This process is formally explicated within the adaptive logics framework in terms of a preferential model semantics.

• Mathieu Beirlaen, Jesse Heyninck, and Christian Straßer,
Structured Argumentation with Prioritized Conditional Obligations and Permissions,
Studia Logica.

We present a formal argumentation system for dealing with the detachment of prioritized conditional obligations and permissions. In the presence of facts and constraints, we answer the question whether an unconditional obligation or permission is detachable by considering arguments for and against its detachment. For the evaluation of arguments in favour of detachment, we use a Dung-style argumentation-theoretical semantics. We illustrate how violations and contrary-to-duty scenarios are dealt with in our framework, and pay special attention to conflict-resolution via priorities.

• Ofer Arieli, AnneMarie Borg, and Christian Straßer,
Hypersequent-based Argumentation: An Instantiation in the Relevance Logic RM,
Proceedings of TAFA 2017 (The 2017 International Workshop on Theory and Applications of Formal Argument).

In this paper we introduce hypersequent-based frameworks for the modeling of defeasible reasoning by means of logic-based argumentation. These frameworks are an extension of sequent-based argu- mentation frameworks, in which arguments are represented not only by sequents, but by more general expressions, called hypersequents. This generalization allows us to overcome some of the weaknesses of logical argumentation reported in the literature and to prove several desirable properties, stated in terms of rationality postulates. For this, we take the relevance logic RM as the deductive base of our formalism. This logic is regarded as “by far the best understood of the Anderson-Belnap style systems” (Dunn & Restall, Handbook of Philosophical Logic, Vol.6). It has a clear semantics in terms of Sugihara matrices, as well as sound and com- plete Hilbert- and Gentzen-type proof systems. The latter are defined by hypersequents and admit cut elimination. We show that hypersequent-based argumentation yields a robust defeasible variant of RM with many desirable properties.

• AnneMarie Borg, Daniel Frey, Dunja Seselja, and Christian Straßer,
Examining Network Effects in an Argumentative Agent-Based Model of Scientific Inquiry,
Forthcoming in the FoLLI Series on Logic, Language and Information, Springer.

• Jesse Heyninck and Christian Straßer,
Revisiting Unrestricted Rebut and Preferences in Structured Argumentation.,
IJCAI 2017

• Jesse Heyninck, Peter Verdée and Albrecht Heeffer,
Handling Inconsistencies in the Early Calculus An Adaptive Logic for the Design of Chunk and Permeate Structures,
Journal of Philosophical Logic, doi:10.1007/s10992-017-9436-z. link

• Mathieu Beirlaen, Jesse Heyninck, and Christian Straßer,
Reasoning by Cases in Structured Argumentation
in KRR/SAC 2017

• Ofer Arieli, Annemarie Borg, and Christian Straßer,
Argumentative Approaches to Reasoning with Consistent Subsets of Premises,
Proceedings of IEA/AIE’2017, Lecture Notes in Artificial Intelligence series, Springer

• Annemarie Borg, Daniel Frey, Dunja Seselja and Christian Straßer,
An argumentative agent-based model of scientific inquiry,
Proceedings of IEA/AIE’2017, Lecture Notes in Artificial Intelligence series, Springer (poster paper)

## 2016

• Hans van Ditmarsch, Jan van Eijck, Pere Pardo, Rahim Ramezanian,
Epistemic protocols for dynamic gossip,
Journal of Applied Logic, online first

• Ofer Arieli and Christian Straßer,
/Deductive argumentation by enhanced sequent calculi and dynamic derivations/,
Electronic Notes in Theoretical Computer Science, 323, 21–37.

• Jesse Heyninck and Christian Straßer,
Relations between assumption-based approaches in nonmonotonic logic and formal argumentation,
Proceedings of NMR2016. pdf

• Ofer Arieli and Christian Straßer,
Argumentative Approaches to Reasoning with Maximal Consistency,
Proceedings of KR16

• Mathieu Beirlaen and Christian Straßer,
A structured argumentation framework for detaching conditional obligations,
Proceedings of DEON 2016

• Mathieu Beirlaen and Matthieu Fontaine,
Forthcoming in Logica Universalis

• Christian Straßer and Frederik Van de Putte,
Proof Theories for superpositions of adaptive logics,
Forthcoming in Logique et Analyse

• Christian Straßer, Mathieu Beirlaen, and Frederik Van De Putte,

## Selected publications, 2014–2015

• Roman Kuznets and AnneMarie Borg,
Realization Theorems for Justification Logics: Full Modularity,
Proceedings of Tableaux 2015 (Wroclaw, Poland)

• Ofer Arieli and Christian Straßer,
Sequent-Based Logical Argumentation,
Argument & Computation, Volume 6, Issue 1, 2015

• Christian Straßer and Ofer Arieli,
Normative Reasoning by Sequent-Based Argumentation,
Journal of Logic and Computation (special issue on the DEON 2014 conference)

• Christian Straßer and Aldo Antonelli,
Nonmonotonic Logic,
Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy.

• Dunja Šešelja and Christian Straßer,
Concerning Peter Vickers’ Recent Treatment of ‘Paraconsistencitis’: Review article of Peter Vickers,
Understanding Inconsistent Science. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2014. xii + 273 pp.

• Mathieu Beirlaen and Atocha Aliseda,
A conditional logic for abduction,
Synthese, Volume 191, Issue 15, pages 3733-3758, 2014

• Mathieu Beirlaen,
A Regress Objection to Thagard’s Theory of Deductive Coherence,
Erkenntnis, 2014

• Mathieu Beirlaen and Christian Straßer,
/Non-Monotonic Reasoning with Normative Conflicts in Multi-Agent Deontic Logic/,
Journal of Logic and Computation, Volume 24, Issue 6, pages 1179-1207, 2014.

• Ofer Arieli, Christian Straßer,
Dynamic Derivations for Sequent-Based Deductive Argumentation,
Computational Models of Argument (Ed. S. Parsons, COMMA14) in the series Frontiers in Artificial Intelligence and Applications, IOS Press, pp. 89–100, 2014

• Christian Straßer, Ofer Arieli,
Sequent-Based Argumentation for Normative Reasoning,
Deontic Logic and Normative Systems (Ed. Fabrizio Cariani, Davide Grossi, Joke Meheus, Xavier Parent) in the series Lecture Notes in Computer Science, Springer, pp. 224–240, 2014

• Christian Straßer,
Adaptive Logic and Defeasible Reasoning. Applications in Argumentation, Normative Reasoning and Default Reasoning,
Trends in Logic-series on Springer, Volume 38, 2014

Created: 2019-02-15 Fri 16:59

Validate