Frameworks for arguing about coalitions are based on non-monotonic logic and are therefore formal and abstract, whereas social theories about agent coalitions typically are based on conceptual modeling languages and therefore semi-formal and detailed. In this paper we bridge the gap between these two research areas such that social viewpoints can be used to argue about coalitions. We formally d...

During a dialog, agents exchange information with each other and need thus to deal with incoming information. For that purpose, they should be able to reason effectively about the trustworthiness of information sources. This paper proposes an argument-based system that allows an agent to reason about her own beliefs and information received from other sources. An agent’s beliefs are of two kind...

Evaluative statements, where some entity has a qualitative attribute, appear widespread in blogs, political discussions, and consumer websites. Such expressions can occur in argumentative settings, where they are the conclusion of an argument. Whether the argument holds depends on the premises that express a user’s point of view. Where different users disagree, arguments may arise. There are se...

Abstract Digital history has only rarely created interpretative or argumentative scholarship that contributes back to disciplinary understandings of the past. The reasons for this are varied: digital historians have often preferred create public audiences, they pursued forms which do not lend themselves explicit interpretation. But we contend had sufficient models patterns historical argumentat...