Univ., Habil.-Schr.--Düsseldorf, 2001. / Literaturverz. S. [267] - 280.

In this thesis, a model for argument revision is presented, in terms of the expansion and contraction of a system of structured argumentation. At its core, the model uses the belief revision concept of minimal change, but without requiring a pre-determined entrenchment ordering to establish minimality. In the first part of the thesis, a model for argument revision is defined and described. Specified in terms of the ASPIC\+ framework for argumentation, the model is divided into two main concepts: argument expansion, whose goal is to make certain arguments acceptable in the system, possibly by adding them; and argument contraction, whose goal is to make certain arguments unacceptable in the system, possibly by removing them. The goal of a revision process can be achieved in multiple different ways, thus a method of choosing which, based on measures of minimal change, is also specified. The second part of the thesis demonstrates two applications of the model in the context of multi-agent dialogue. The first is used to assist a participant when faced with a need to update its commitment store during persuasion dialogue, while the second shows how a participant can use argument revision techniques to both assess and maintain a lie.The main contributions of the thesis are twofold. First, the characterisation of a model for argument revision, based on established belief revision principles but with a key difference. The model for argument revision demonstrates how it is possible to use measurable effects on the system when determining minimal change instead of relying on a pre-determined, qualitative entrenchment ordering.Second, the thesis demonstrates two applications of argument revision in dialogue. The first is in assisting an agent in retracting a commitment that has been defeated, and for which it can offer no defence. When retracting a claim, the participant may also be required to retract other claims from which the defeated one is a consequence. Applying argument revision techniques allow the participant to reason about what constitutes a minimal set of retractions, in terms of current commitments and potential future communications in the dialogue.The second dialogical application relates to the opposite of retraction; instead of choosing to retract an undefended claim, the participant could instead choose to lie in order to defend it. Argument revision allows the participant to not only assess whether or not lying is ``minimal'' (compared to retracting), but to also to maintain the lie, by using the measures of minimal change.Overall, the thesis shows that not only is justifiable argument revision possible without relying on a pre-determined entrenchment ordering, it is also a powerful tool for participants in a dialogue, assisting with dialogue move selection.

Zugl.: Jena, Univ., Habil.-Schr., 2004

Köln, University, Diss., 2004.

Köln, Universiẗat, Diss., 2001.

Giessen, University, Diss., 2001.

Tübingen, University, Diss., 2002.

Wuppertal, University, Diss., 2002.

Cette thèse s’inscrit à la fois dans le cadre de la théorie des trois fonctions primaires qui s’inspire de la théorie distributionaliste de Z. Harris (la fonction prédicative, la fonction argumentale et la fonction actualisatrice) et dans la lignée des travaux qui ne distinguent pas la langue générale des langues spécialisées, du point de vue de leur fonctionnement syntaxique et sémantique. La terminologie médicale est décrite, ici, dans le cadre de la phrase. Nous avons analysé les termes médicaux selon leurs emplois prédicatifs ou argumentaux. Cette analyse a donné lieu à l’élaboration de bases de données. Une interface d’interrogation a été élaborée, par la suite, afin de permettre aux utilisateurs potentiels d’effectuer des recherches ciblées. / This thesis falls within the framework of the Three Primary Functions theory based on Z. Harris’s distributionalist theory (predicative function, argumental function and actualizing function), as well as in the line of work that does not distinguish between general and specialized languages considering their syntactic and semantic functioning. The medical terminology is described here in the context of the sentence. We analyzed the medical terms according to their argumental or predicative employment. This analysis led to the development of databases. A query interface has been developed subsequently, to allow potential users to conduct targeted research.

Studiens syfte är att undersöka de argument som utvecklas i elevers matematiska resonemang vid lösandet av en problemlösningsuppgift i årskurs 1. För att undersöka detta har en undersökning av kvalitativ ansats med observation som metod genomförts på en grundskola i Mellansverige. Enligt tidigare forskning finns fyra typer av argument i ett matematiskt resonemang som alla bygger på varandra i en viss ordning och hänger ihop som en kedja. Resultatet av denna studie visar att argumenten inte bygger på varandra i en viss ordning utan kommer utifrån vad tidigare elev har sagt. Bland annat återfinns ett identifierande argument i mitten av ett resonemang och inte i början så som tidigare forskning påstår. Resultatet visar även att eleverna är multimodala vid lösandet av problemet och använder sig av gester, kroppsspråk och symboler för att förstärka eller visa sina argument i resonemanget. Studien har även kommit fram till att valet av uppgift vid problemlösning är av stor vikt då symbolerna som är tänkta att underlätta problemet för eleverna kan göra så att eleverna tolkar uppgiften på ett annat sätt och på så sätt avviker från problemets kärna. / <p>Matematik</p>