Using Argumentation to Tackle Inconsistency and Incompleteness in Online Distributed Life Science Resources

This paper starts with a discussion of the sometimes contradictory and incomplete nature of distributed online bioinformatics resources. From this we suggest there is a need for a method to evaluate the data contained in such resources before they are used. The method we put forward uses a form of non-monotonic reasoning called argumentation. Arguments are created to help the user weigh up the evidence in favour of and against the biomedical information presented by different Internet-based resources.