Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-8bljj Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-06-20T03:44:55.948Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Towards an argument interchange format

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  04 December 2006

CARLOS CHESÑEVAR
Affiliation:
Universitat de Lleida, Catalunya, Spain; e-mail: cic@eps.udl.es Universidad Nacional del Sur, Argentina
MCGINNIS
Affiliation:
University of Edinburgh, UK
SANJAY MODGIL
Affiliation:
Cancer Research UK, UK
IYAD RAHWAN
Affiliation:
University of Edinburgh, UK British University in Dubai, UAE
CHRIS REED
Affiliation:
University of Dundee, UK
GUILLERMO SIMARI
Affiliation:
Universidad Nacional del Sur, Argentina
MATTHEW SOUTH
Affiliation:
Cancer Research UK, UK
GERARD VREESWIJK
Affiliation:
Universiteit Utrecht, The Netherlands
STEVEN WILLMOTT
Affiliation:
Universitat Politècnica de Catalunya, Catalunya, Spain

Abstract

The theory of argumentation is a rich, interdisciplinary area of research straddling the fields of artificial intelligence, philosophy, communication studies, linguistics and psychology. In the last few years, significant progress has been made in understanding the theoretical properties of different argumentation logics. However, one major barrier to the development and practical deployment of argumentation systems is the lack of a shared, agreed notation or ‘interchange format’ for argumentation and arguments. In this paper, we describe a draft specification for an argument interchange format (AIF) intended for representation and exchange of data between various argumentation tools and agent-based applications. It represents a consensus ‘abstract model’ established by researchers across fields of argumentation, artificial intelligence and multi-agent systems. In its current form, this specification is intended as a starting point for further discussion and elaboration by the community, rather than an attempt at a definitive, all-encompassing model. However, to demonstrate proof of concept, a use case scenario is briefly described. Moreover, three concrete realizations or ‘reifications’ of the abstract model are illustrated.

Type
Review Article
Copyright
2006 Cambridge University Press

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)