Cette thèse se situe dans le domaine des modèles de l’argumentation en intelligence artificielle. Ces modèles constituent des outils très populaires pour l’étude de raisonnements en présence d’incohérences dans les bases de connaissances et lors de la négociation entre agents et la prise de décision. Un modèle argumentatif est un processus interactionnel principalement basé sur la construction d’arguments et de contre-arguments, l’étude des relations entre ces différents arguments et la mise en place de critères permettant de déterminer le statut de chaque argument afin de sélectionner les arguments (les plus) acceptables.Dans ce cadre, ce travail a porté sur l’étude d’un système particulier : le système d’argumentation déductif. Un argument est alors entendu comme un couple prémisses-conclusion tel que la conclusion soit une formule qui puisse être déduite des prémisses. Nous y avons traité plusieurs questions. Tout d’abord, partant du constat que le raisonnement par l’absurde est valide en logique propositionnelle classique, nous proposons une méthode de génération d’arguments en faveur d’une proposition donnée. Cette approche s’étend au calcul des undercuts canoniques, arguments identifiés comme représentant tous les contre-arguments. Contrairement aux autres approches proposées dans la littérature, notre technique est complète au sens où elle permet de générer, modulo une possible explosion combinatoire, tous les arguments relatifs à une formule logique quelconque. Ensuite, nous avons proposé un cadre d’argumentation en logique conditionnelle. Les logiques conditionnelles sont souvent considérées comme étant tout particulièrement adaptées à la formalisation de raisonnements de nature hypothétique. Leur connecteur conditionnel est en effet souvent plus proche de l’intuition que l’on peut avoir de l’implication que ne l’est l’implication matérielle de la logique propositionnelle classique. Ceci nous permet de proposer un concept de contrariété conditionnelle qui couvre à la fois les situations de conflits logiques fondés sur l’incohérence et une forme particulière de conflit qui ne se traduit pas naturellement par un conflit basé sur l’incohérence : quand un agent affirme une règle de type Si alors, une seconde règle qui peut en être déduite et qui impose la satisfaction de prémisses supplémentaires peut apparaître conflictuelle. Nous étudions alors sur cette base les principaux éléments d’une théorie de l’argumentation dans une logique conditionnelle. Enfin, le dernier point étudié dans ce travail concerne le raisonnement au sujet de ressources consommables, dans un cadre où les formules logiques sont elles mêmes consommées dans le processus déductif. Nous proposons une logique, simple et proche du langage et des principes de la logique propositionnelle classique, permettant le raisonnement à partir de ressources consommables et de quantité bornée. Nous y revisitons également les principaux éléments d’une théorie logique de l’argumentation. / This thesis focus on the field of argumentation models in artificial intelligence. These models form very popular tools to study reasoning under inconsistency in knowledge bases, negotiation between agents, and also in decision making. An argumentative model is an interactional process mainly based on the construction of arguments and counter-arguments, then studying the relations between these arguments, and finally the introduction of some criteria to identifying the status of each argument in order to select the (most) acceptable of them.In this context, this work was dealt with the study of a particular system: the deductive argumentation framework. An argument is then understood as a pair premises-conclusion such that conclusion is a logical formula entailed by premises, a non-ordered collection of logical formulas. We have addressed several issues. First of all, on the basis that reductio ad absurdum is valid in classical propositional logic, we propose a method to compute arguments for a given statement. This approach is extended to generate canonical undercuts, arguments identified as the representative of all counter-arguments. Contrary to the other approaches proposed in the literature, our technique is complete in the sense that all arguments relative to the statement at hand are generated and so are all relevant counter-arguments. Secondly, we proposed a logic based argumentation in conditional logic. Conditional logic is often regarded as an appealing setting for the formalization of hypothetical reasoning. Their conditional connective is often regarded as a very suitable connective to encode many implicative reasoning patterns real-life and attempts to avoid some pitfalls of material implication of propositional logic. This allows us to put in light and encompass a concept of conditional contrariety thats covers both usual inconsistency-based conflict and a specific form of conflict that often occurs in real-life argumentation: i.e., when an agent asserts an If then rule, it can be argued that the satisfaction of additional conditions are required for the conclusion of a rule to hold. Then, in that case we study the main foundational concepts of an argumentation theory in conditional logic. Finally, the last point investigated in this work concerns the reasoning about bounded resources, within a framework in which logical formulas are themselves consumed in the deductive process. First, a simple variant of Boolean logic is introduced, allowing us to reason about consuming resources. Then, the main concepts of logic-based argumentation are revisited in this framework.

Philosophiae Doctor - PhD / The study investigated the impact of a dialogical argumentation instructional model (DAIM) as an intervention teaching strategy to assist pre-service science teachers to implement integrated science-indigenous knowledge (IK) lessons during their seven week block teaching practice at schools in the Western Cape. This imperative is found in Specific Aim 3 of the Curriculum and Assessment Policy Statement (CAPS) of the South African School Curriculum (Department of Basics Education, 2011). The study focussed on the pre-post conceptions of pre-service science teachers’ conceptions of the nature of science and the nature of indigenous knowledge. In addition the study examined pre-service teachers’ sense of self-efficacy in deploying a dialogical argumentation instructional model to implement an integrated science-IK lesson. The sample consisted of a cohort of thirty (30) Post-graduate Certificate of Education (PGCE) students training to teach at the Further Education and Training (FET) phase of school. They were a combined class enrolled for method in Natural Sciences, Life Sciences and Physical Sciences. A mixed methods approach was used to generate quantitative and qualitative data using a series of questionnaires, reflective diaries, journals and focus group interviews. Transcripts provided a rich bank of data of which only exemplars were used to highlight trends and to illustrate how theoretical constructs were used as analytical tools. The theoretical constructs used were Toulmin’s (1958/2003) Argumentation Pattern (TAP), Ogunniyi’s (1997) Contiguity Argumentation Theory (CAT) and Banduras’ Social Cognitive Theory (1986). The findings showed that the pre-service teachers appeared to overestimate their sense of self-efficacy (i.e. the ease and comfort) in using DAIM to implement a science- IK curriculum at the pre-test than at the post-test. The study also identified important implications for policy, teacher training programmes, teaching practice, pre-service science teachers, learners and further research. Furthermore, the pre-service reflective experiences indicated their increased awareness of the challenges and successes related to using dialogical argumentation to integrate a science-IK lesson. The most important contribution of this study to an argumentation paradigm was the emergence of a visual model called the Pyramid Argumentation Model that succinctly connected the apparent disparate module units in a holistic way (To be discussed in follow-up reports). The findings revealed numerous complexities as the participants navigated their own cosmologies of a scientific worldview and that of their indigenous knowledge worldview. Finally, the findings have not only corroborated the findings in earlier studies with respect to the merits and demerits of argumentation instruction but also identified various challenges that prospective and even practicing teachers might encounter in an attempt to make school science relevant to the sociocultural environment of learners especially those living in indigenous or traditional societies like the participants in this study.

Nesta dissertação, o objetivo foi identificar os movimentos epistêmicos de uma professora relacionados à construção de argumentos em produções escritas de estudantes no Ensino Su-perior. Os dados dessa pesquisa são provenientes de atividades de uma disciplina de Anato-mia Vegetal, do primeiro semestre de um curso de Ciências Biológicas (licenciatura e bacha-relado), no âmbito de uma universidade pública do Estado de São Paulo. O objeto de estudo dessa pesquisa consistiu no recorte de uma atividade prática proposta pela docente no qual os estudantes, após um processo investigativo, redigiram uma produção escrita com os resulta-dos de suas investigações. Para a constituição do corpus de análise, utilizamos a primeira ver-são da produção escrita, os turnos de fala da aula de orientação para a reescrita da mesma, e a segunda versão da produção escrita. Os argumentos das duas versões das produções escritas foram identificados de acordo com o modelo de Toulmin (2006). Os movimentos epistêmicos foram identificados a partir das categorias de análise e dos descritores propostos por Silva (2015). Observamos que a docente, na aula de orientação, enfatizou questões relativas à pro-priedade intelectual, à construção de dados a partir de imagens de cortes anatômicos, e à arti-culação dos dados com as conclusões da produção escrita. Com isto, identificamos uma pre-dominância de movimentos epistêmicos relacionados à construção de dados e apoios dos ar-gumentos. Os movimentos epistêmicos mais frequentes foram instrução e correção. Com-preendemos que esse resultado é reflexo dos objetivos traçados pela docente para esse mo-mento da atividade prática. Constatamos que nem todos os movimentos epistêmicos identifi-cados promoveram mudanças na produção escrita, segundo o esperado pela docente. Inferi-mos que diferentes fatores podem ter influenciado nesse acontecido, tais como: o tempo de desenvolvimento da investigação; as temáticas de investigação de cada grupo; o engajamento dos estudantes; a incompreensão dos direcionamentos da docente; e a qualidade da primeira versão da produção escrita, na qual a professora se baseou para realizar a aula de orientação. A utilização de ferramentas culturais como a produção escrita dos estudantes de outros anos, livros, artigos e revistas científicas, foi fundamental para o desenvolvimento da atividade. Consideramos que a mediação da professora foi crucial para a promoção de práticas epistêmi-cas relativas à argumentação. Contudo, salientamos que os estudantes tiveram dificuldades de relacionar dados, garantias e conclusões, mesmo após a aula de orientação. Compreendemos que há a necessidade de se propor atividades de ensino semelhantes, bem como realizar pes-quisas com o intuito de assimilar se a utilização de movimentos epistêmicos que não foram identificados na aula de orientação, como exemplos: elaboração, reelaboração e síntese, auxiliarão os estudantes a relacionar dados, garantias e conclusões em produções escritas. / The aim of this dissertation was to identify the epistemic movements of a professor related to the construction of arguments in written productions of students in Higher Education. The data of this research come from the activities of a Plant Anatomy discipline, in the first semes-ter of a Biological Sciences course (undergraduate), within a public university in the State of São Paulo. The object of study of this research consisted in the part of a practical activity pro-posed by the professor in which the students, after an investigative process, wrote a written production with the results of their investigations. For the constitution of the corpus of analy-sis, we use the first version of the written production, the speech shifts of the orientation class for the rewriting of the same, and the second version of the written production. The arguments of the two versions of the written productions were identified according to the model of Toulmin (2006). The epistemic movements were identified from the categories of analysis and the descriptors proposed by Silva (2015). We observed that the professor, in the orienta-tion class, emphasized issues related to intellectual property, the construction of data from anatomical cuts, and the articulation of data with the conclusions of written production. With this, we identified a predominance of epistemic movements related to data construction and argument support. The most frequent epistemic movements were instruction and correction. We understand that this result reflects the objectives set by the professor for this moment of practical activity. We found that not all identified epistemic movements promoted changes in written production, as expected by the professor. We infer that different factors may have influenced this, such as: the time of research development; the research themes of each group; student\'s engagement; the misunderstanding of the directions of the professor; and the quality of the first version of the written production, in which the professor was based to take the ori-entation class. The use of cultural tools such as the written production of students from other years, books, articles and scientific journals was fundamental for the development of the ac-tivity. We consider that the professor\'s mediation was crucial for the promotion of epistemic practices related to argumentation. However, we pointed out that students had difficulties in relating data, warrants and conclusions even after the orientation class. We understand that there is a need to propose similar teaching activities, as well as to research if the use of epis-temic movements that were not identified in the orientation class, such as: elaboration, re-elaboration and synthesis, will help the students to relate data, warrants and conclusions in written productions.

A análise dos provérbios franceses como argumentos requer um estudo prévio de suas origens, de seu papel histórico-cultural e de suas características. Os elementos principais que o diferem de outros gêneros de frase são o seu conteúdo sentencioso, a sua fixação formal que lhe permite ser reconhecido como frase autônoma, a sua natureza implicativa e sua relação com a natureza humana. Os provérbios nos textos atuam principalmente como uma transposição metafórica, mas possuem um duplo valor semântico que permeia entre o sentido hiponímico e o hiperonímico. Além disso, a subjetividade do gênero, permite uma debreagem do EU enunciativo, apoiando-se num enunciador não identificável e em múltiplas enunciações anteriores, constituindo assim um discurso de autoridade, que provém de uma sabedoria anônima incontestada. Todas estas propriedades linguísticas colaboram com a sua força argumentativa. Para a análise do provérbio como forma de argumentação foram utilizadas as três provas da retórica Aristotélica: o ETHOS, considerando o provérbio como elemento simbólico, que constroe o caráter do enunciador apoiando-se na tradição paremíaca, o PATHOS , à partir da hipótese da análise do provérbio como modalidade epistêmica, trabalhando com as supostas lexicalidades que estariam envolvidas na manipulação discursiva entre enunciador e enunciatário e, o LOGOS constituindo à partir das premissas argumentativas uma prova racional, baseada no silogismo e no entimema. O gênero de texto escolhido foi as crônicas de arte onde um provérbio serve como argumento, devido ao seu caráter atemporal, a sua riqueza estilística e a sua importância como meio de comunicação contemporâneo que através da arte contesta e polemiza comportamentos e padrões sociais de uma forma irônica e sutil. / The analysis of French proverbs as arguments requires a previous study of their origins, historical and cultural role and their characteristics. The main elements that differ them from other sentence genres are their sentence content, their fixed form that allows them to be recognized as an independent sentence, their implicative nature and their relationship with human nature. The proverbs in texts mainly act as a metaphorical trasnposition, but they have double semantic value permeating between the hipernymy and hyponymy sense. Additionally the genre subjectivity allows a débrayage of enunciative I on the basis of an unidentifiable enunciator and a number of previous enunciations, thus constituting an authority speech that derives from an unquestioned anonymous wisdom. All these linguistic properties cooperate with their argumentative force. To analyze the proverb as a form of argumentation, three proofs of Aristotelian rhetoric have been used : ETHOS considering the proverb as a symbolic element that creates the enunciator character on the basis of paroemiac tradition; PATHOS from the hypothesis of proverb analysis as an epistemic modality, working with the supposed lexicalities that would be involved in the discursive manipulation between enunciator and enunciatee; and, LOGOS constituting a reasonable proof from the argumentation premises on the bases of syllogism and enthymeme. The text genre chosen is the art chronicle in wich a proverb serves as an argument due to its non-temporal character, stylistic richness and importance as a means of contemporary communication that ironically and subtly contests and polemizes behaviors and social standards through art.

O direito à educação é um direito fundamental social porque requer a realização de prestações estatais positivas normativas e materiais. No Brasil, o direito à educação encontra justificação jusfundamental nas proposições normativas das disposições dos arts. 6º e 205 da Constituição Federal. As sentenças jurídicas nesse âmbito podem encontrar melhor justificação racional se assentadas no modelo de direitos sociais de Alexy, na ponderação e na argumentação no âmbito dos direitos sociais. O modelo de direitos sociais estabelece a ideia de que uma colisão de princípios envolvendo o direito fundamental à educação deve ser resolvida pela ponderação. O direito à educação, antes um direito prima facie, somente pode se tornar definitivo pela ponderação e a extração de uma norma de direito fundamental associada ao direito fundamental à educação. Essa norma associada constitui uma das posições fundamentais jurídicas que formatam o direito fundamental à educação, constituído de um feixe de posições fundamentais jurídicas. A ponderação como forma de aplicação do direito fundamental à educação deve ser realizada por um procedimento que possui regras e passos que devem ser observados rigorosamente, para que possa ser um procedimento racional. A partir disso é possível verificar quais os interesses que, abstratamente com mesma hierarquia, tem peso maior no caso concreto. A ponderação, uma vez levado a sério seu procedimento, constitui forma de argumento do discurso racional, enfraquecendo qualquer alegação acerca de sua irracionalidade. Se direitos fundamentais são princípios que podem colidir e se deixam solucionar pela ponderação, e se a racionalidade das decisões depende da argumentação jurídica para sua justificação, resta demonstrada a conexão entre ponderação e argumentação. O resultado disso será a existência de uma ponderação racional que conduza a resultados corretos. A argumentação jurídica tem o papel de assegurar a racionalidade à ponderação a partir da correção das premissas e da fundamentação correta de cada passo do procedimento. Esta investigação pretende deixar justificado que a interpretação e aplicação das normas do direito fundamental social à educação para fins da imposição judicial de deveres jurídicos definitivos a prestações estatais materiais constitui empresa passível de racionalidade. Palavras-chave: direito fundamental, educação, ponderação, argumentação. / The right to education is a fundamental social right because it requires the realization of positive normative and material state benefits. In Brazil, the right to education finds justification in the normative propositions of the provisions of arts. 6 and 205 of the Federal Constitution. Legal decision in this area can find a better rationale if they are based on Alexy's social rights model, on social rights weighting and argumentation. The social rights model establishes the idea that a collision of principles involving the fundamental right to education must be resolved by weighing. The right to education, rather a prima facie right, can only become definitive by weighing and extracting a rule of fundamental right associated with the fundamental right to education. This associated rule is one of the fundamental legal positions that shape the fundamental right to education, which is a bundle of fundamental legal positions. A procedure that has rules and steps that must be strictly observed so that it can be a rational procedure must perform weighting as a form of application of the fundamental right to education. From this, it is possible to verify which interests that, abstractly with the same hierarchy, have greater weight in the concrete case. Weighting, once taken seriously, constitutes a form of rational discourse argument, weakening any claim about its irrationality. If fundamental rights are principles that can collide and can be solved by weighing, and if the rationality of decisions depends on the legal argumentation for their justification, the connection between weighting and argumentation remains. The result of this will be the existence of a rational weighting leading to the correct results. The legal argument has the role of ensuring rationality to the weighting from the correction of the premises and the correct foundation of each step of the procedure. This investigation intends to justify that the interpretation and application of the norms of the fundamental social right to education for the purpose of the judicial imposition of definitive legal obligations to material state benefits constitutes an enterprise that is rational.

Hoy en día los sistemas informáticos complejos se pueden ven en términos de los servicios que ofrecen y las entidades que interactúan para proporcionar o consumir dichos servicios. Los sistemas multi-agente abiertos, donde los agentes pueden entrar o salir del sistema, interactuar y formar grupos (coaliciones de agentes u organizaciones) de forma dinámica para resolver problemas, han sido propuestos como una tecnología adecuada para implementar este nuevo paradigma informático. Sin embargo, el amplio dinamismo de estos sistemas requiere que los agentes tengan una forma de armonizar los conflictos que surgen cuando tienen que colaborar y coordinar sus actividades. En estas situaciones, los agentes necesitan un mecanismo para argumentar de forma eficiente (persuadir a otros agentes para que acepten sus puntos de vista, negociar los términos de un contrato, etc.) y poder llegar a acuerdos. La argumentación es un medio natural y efectivo para abordar los conflictos y contradicciones del conocimiento. Participando en diálogos argumentativos, los agentes pueden llegar a acuerdos con otros agentes. En un sistema multi-agente abierto, los agentes pueden formar sociedades que los vinculan a través de relaciones de dependencia. Estas relaciones pueden surgir de sus interacciones o estar predefinidas por el sistema. Además, los agentes pueden tener un conjunto de valores individuales o sociales, heredados de los grupos a los que pertenecen, que quieren promocionar. Las dependencias entre los agentes y los grupos a los que pertenecen y los valores individuales y sociales definen el contexto social del agente. Este contexto tiene una influencia decisiva en la forma en que un agente puede argumentar y llegar a acuerdos con otros agentes. Por tanto, el contexto social de los agentes debería tener una influencia decisiva en la representación computacional de sus argumentos y en el proceso de gestión de argumentos. / Heras Barberá, SM. (2011). Case-Based Argumentation in Agent Societies [Tesis doctoral no publicada]. Universitat Politècnica de València. https://doi.org/10.4995/Thesis/10251/12497 / Palancia

Contributions from elementary education to the practice and reality of critical thinking are rare, largely because attempts in basic education to elucidate a concept of critical thinking have a hard time breaking through the elusiveness and indeterminacy that characterize the history and reality of the concept. This situation is due to, and a consequence of, the difficulty of delimiting critical thinking from related fields, such as metacognition, higher-order-thinking, problem solving, informal logic, reasoning skills, and decision making, to name a few. Texas school authorities designed and put into practice a battery of tools to evaluate critical thinking through the assessment programs TAKS and STAAR, without taking a position regarding the indeterminacy problems of the content of critical thinking. The purpose of this study was to reconstruct the pieces of the critical thinking model imparted to Texas elementary school children since 1999 and continues today. The findings indicate that the critical thinking model implemented in Texas elementary schools is a particular version of a skills-only approach of critical thinking that follows the classical logical paradigm, consisting of two sets of complementary skills. This model acquaints students with the components and structure of five types of arguments while it fails to substantiate the logic of argument support that demonstrates how reasons support claims and the strength of support. The application of an adequacy conditions rubric showed the strengths of the model at the argumentation analysis level, yet it showed clear signs of incompleteness and inconsistencies at the argument structure level that distort its purpose and function.

This work deals with communication in multiagent systems. The protocols for negotiation and argumentation are shown, and model example of their usage is described. We describe hierarchical model of trust in contexts, that is used for representation of agent's believes. The argumentation protocol for those agents is designed, and is used for solving conflicts.

Es wird eine sprachliche Erweiterung der Aussagenlogik vorgeschlagen. Es handelt sich um eine Art von schwacher Negation ('disbelief'). Eine entsprechende Logik wird entwickelt. Diese wird semantisch charakterisiert. Weiterhin wird auf Schwierigkeiten hingewiesen, die bei der Axiomatisierung auftreten werden.

We introduce a new linear time compression algorithm, called 'Repair for Trees', which compresses ordered trees over a ranked alphabet using linear straight-line context-free tree grammars. Such grammars generalize straight-line context-free string grammars and allow basic tree operations, like traversal along edges, to be executed without prior decompression. Our algorithm can be considered as a generalization of the 'Re-pair' algorithm developed by N. Jesper Larsson and Alistair Moffat in 2000. The latter algorithm is a dictionary-based compression algorithm for strings. We also introduce a succinct coding which is specialized in further compressing the grammars generated by our algorithm. Thisis accomplished without loosing the ability do directly execute queries on this compressed representation of the input tree. Finally, we compare the grammars and output files generated by a prototype of the Re-pair for Trees algorithm with those of similar compression algorithms. The obtained results show that that our algorithm outperforms its competitors in terms of compression ratio, runtime and memory usage.