IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/pet/annals/v13y2013i2p31-36.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Mapping Complex Debates: A Case Study on Austhink Rationale

Author

Listed:
  • Ciprian Cucu

    („1 Decembrie 1918” University, Alba Iulia, Romania)

Abstract

Argumentation is considered the most important way humans can deal with conflicting information (Besnard & Hunter, 2008) by finding and organizing justifications for proposed claims. Argumentation is widely used in several domains such as law, politics and management (as decision support). Consequently, for any domain in which a structured argument may be developed, a computer system may be used to aid the process (eg. by storing facts, automatically evaluating arguments or visually representing argument maps). The current paper presents a case study on creating argument visualizations (argument maps) for complex arguments, using the Austhink Rationale software.

Suggested Citation

  • Ciprian Cucu, 2013. "Mapping Complex Debates: A Case Study on Austhink Rationale," Annals of the University of Petrosani, Economics, University of Petrosani, Romania, vol. 13(2), pages 31-36.
    • Handle: RePEc:pet:annals:v:13:y:2013:i:2:p:31-36
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://upet.ro/annals/economics/pdf/2013/part2/Cucu_C.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    More about this item

    Keywords

    argumentation; computer systems; learning;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • D83 - Microeconomics - - Information, Knowledge, and Uncertainty - - - Search; Learning; Information and Knowledge; Communication; Belief; Unawareness
    • L86 - Industrial Organization - - Industry Studies: Services - - - Information and Internet Services; Computer Software

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:pet:annals:v:13:y:2013:i:2:p:31-36. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Imola Driga (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.upet.ro/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.