P. Lorenzen and K. Lorenz. Dialogische Logik. Wissenschaftliche Buchgesellschaft, Darmstadt, Germany, 1978.  Home/Search   Document Not in Database   Summary   Related Articles   Check

.... they were widely studied by philosophers in medieval times [24, 61] In modern times, philosophers have used formal dialogue games to study non deductive forms of reasoning, such as the classical fallacies [24, 33] and to provide a game theoretic semantics for intuitionistic and classical logic [32] and for quantum logic [44] These games have also found application in computational linguistics and Arti cial Intelligence (AI) In linguistics, they have been used to explain sequences of human utterances [30] with subsequent application to machine based natural language processing and ....

P. Lorenzen and K. Lorenz. Dialogische Logik. Wissenschaftliche Buchgesellschaft, Darmstadt, Germany, 1978.

....between two or more participants who move by uttering locutions, according to certain rules. They were first studied by Aristotle [7] and have been used in modern philosophy to understand fallacious arguments [27, 41] and to provide a game theoretic semantics for formal logical systems [38]. Over the last decade they have been applied in various areas of computer science and artificial intelligence: for the specification of software systems with multiple stakeholders [16] for the design of man machine interfaces [8, 30] for the analysis of complex human reasoning [54] and for the ....

P. Lorenzen and K. Lorenz. Dialogische Logik. Wissenschaftliche Buchgesellschaft, Darmstadt, Germany, 1978.

.... move by uttering locutions, according to certain pre defined rules. They have been studied by philosophers since the time of Aristotle, most recently for the contextual modeling of fallacious reasoning [14, 23] and as a proof theoretic semantics for intuitionistic and classical logic [22]. Outside philosophy, dialogue games have been used in computational linguistics, for natural language explanation and generation, and in artificial intelligence (AI) for automated software design and the modeling of legal reasoning, e.g. 4] In recent years, they have found application as the ....

....consequently the rules and locutions are stricter than most people would consider appropriate for an ordinary (human or agent) persuasion dialogue. Participants must speak in alternating sequence, for example. Moreover, the rigorous persuasion dialogue is based on the dialogue games of [22], originally designed as a constructive proof theory for logical propositions. While such games can be used to construct, step by step, an argument for a proposed group intention, this would seem a singularly inefficient means of persuasion. Allowing agents to express a complete argument for a ....

P. Lorenzen and K. Lorenz. Dialogische Logik. Wissenschaftliche Buchgesellschaft, Darmstadt, 1978.

.... (see, e.g. 66] A game theoretically natural extension of this semantics has led to Independence Friendly Logic [65, 109] Likewise, game theoretic semantics have been proposed for Linear Logic [21, 2] Dialogue Games: The relation of logical consequence has been viewed as a dialogue game in [83], where the precise rules of the game determine whether one obtains intuitionistic or classical logical consequence. Extensions of this work have yielded dialogue games for various modal logics and Linear Logic [110, 111] Model Comparison Games: In recent expositions of model theory (see, e.g. ....

P. Lorenzen and K. Lorenz. Dialogische Logik. Wissenschaftliche Buchgesellschaft, 1978.

....of the dialogue. Yet, claims may, as will be shown, be accepted by the community 3 The changed assessment occurred after a change in management, which reinforces the point being made here. 4 A formal model of dialectical argumentation was also developed by Paul Lorenzen and his colleagues [47, 48] to provide a game theoretic semantics for intuitionistic logic. These models have since been applied, for example, to logics for quantum physics [57] 5 Recent reviews of argumentation in AI include [13, 66] which discuss theoretical aspects, and [10] which reviews applications. In addition, ....

P. Lorenzen and K. Lorenz. Dialogische Logik. Wissenschaftliche Buchgesellschaft, Darmstadt, Germany, 1978.

.... move by uttering locutions, according to certain pre defined rules. They have been studied by philosophers since the time of Aristotle, most recently for the contextual modeling of fallacious reasoning [12, 21] and as a proof theoretic semantics for intuitionistic and classical logic [20]. Outside philosophy, dialogue games have been used in computational linguistics, for natural language explanation and generation, and in artificial intelligence (AI) for automated software design and the modeling of legal reasoning. In recent years, they have found application as the basis for ....

....consequently the rules and locutions are stricter than most people would consider appropriate for an ordinary (human or agent) persuasion dialogue. Participants must speak in alternating sequence, for example. Moreover, the rigorous persuasion dialogue is based on the dialogue games of [20], originally designed as a constructive proof theory for logical propositions. While such games can be used to construct, step by step, an argument for a proposed group intention, this would seem a singularly inefficient 6 An agent asked by an initiator to adopt an intention which conflicts with ....

P. Lorenzen and K. Lorenz. Dialogische Logik. Wissenschaftliche Buchgesellschaft, Darmstadt, Germany, 1978.

.... Dialogue games date at least from the time of Aristotle [3] and were extensively studied by philosophers in the Middle Ages [11] In modern times, they have been used for the contextual analysis of fallacious reasoning [11, 18] to provide a semantics for intuitionistic and classical logic [17], and as a constructive proof theory for statements in quantum logic [25] They di er from the games of economic game theory in that payo s for winning or losing a game are not considered, and because there is no use of uncertainty measures, such as probabilities, to model the possible moves of ....

P. Lorenzen and K. Lorenz. Dialogische Logik. Wissenschaftliche Buchgesellschaft, Darmstadt, Germany, 1978.

....two or more players move by uttering locutions according to some defined rules. Dating at least from the time of Aristotle, dialogue games have been used by contemporary philosophers to study fallacious modes of reasoning [20, 28] and as a gametheoretic semantics for intuitionistic, classical [27] and quantum [37] logic. Within Artificial Intelligence they have been applied to: modeling complex reasoning, e.g. in legal domains [6] human computer interaction [5] designing software development processes [12] and for the design of computational protocols for autonomous agent interactions. ....

P. Lorenzen and K. Lorenz. Dialogische Logik. Wissenschaftliche Buchgesellschaft, Darmstadt, Germany, 1978.

....study of argumentation has a long tradition in philosophy reaching back at least to Aristotle. With the breakthrough of formal logic in the 20th century semantical and proof theoretical questions became dominating issues in logic. Nevertheless, a number of philosophers like Toulmin [37] Lorenzen [18], Hamblin [12] and more recently Walton and Krabbe [44, 43] van Eemeren and Grootendorst [41] and many others have emphasized the dialectical aspects of reasoning and studied, formally or informally, various aspects of argumentation. In recent years the formal study of argumentation became a ....

P. Lorenzen and K. Lorenz. Dialogische Logik. Wissenschaftliche Buchgesellschaft, Darmstadt, 1978.

....combination and resolutions of different arguments. These include the conflict resolution procedures of Rupert Crawshay Williams [11] Arne Naess rules of precizating statements [47] the Dialectical Argumentation of Nicholas Rescher [60] the Dialogue Logic of Paul Lorenzen and his colleagues [41], Else Barth and Erik Krabbe s Formal Dialectics [4] and the Pragma Dialectics of Frans van Eemeren and Rob Grootendorst [71] We are currently examining these various approaches to see which, if any, is approprate for application to design of intelligent risk systems. In addition, Verheij [75] ....

P. Lorenzen and K. Lorenz. Dialogische Logik. Wissenschaftliche Buchgesellschaft, Darmstadt, Germany, 1978.

Online articles have much greater impact   More about CiteSeer.IST   Add search form to your site   Submit documents   Feedback  

CiteSeer.IST - Copyright Penn State and NEC