{"status":"ok","message-type":"work","message-version":"1.0.0","message":{"indexed":{"date-parts":[[2025,10,18]],"date-time":"2025-10-18T10:58:59Z","timestamp":1760785139499,"version":"3.41.2"},"reference-count":50,"publisher":"Frontiers Media SA","license":[{"start":{"date-parts":[[2023,5,19]],"date-time":"2023-05-19T00:00:00Z","timestamp":1684454400000},"content-version":"vor","delay-in-days":0,"URL":"https:\/\/creativecommons.org\/licenses\/by\/4.0\/"}],"content-domain":{"domain":["frontiersin.org"],"crossmark-restriction":true},"short-container-title":["Front. Artif. Intell."],"abstract":"<jats:p>Human and artificial reasoning has to deal with uncertain environments. Ideally, probabilistic information is available. However, sometimes probabilistic information may not be precise or it is missing entirely. In such cases we reason with higher-order uncertainty. Formal argumentation is one of the leading formal methods to model defeasible reasoning in artificial intelligence, in particular in the tradition of Dung's abstract argumentation. Also from the perspective of cognition, reasoning has been considered as argumentative and social in nature, for instance by Mercier and Sperber. In this paper we use formal argumentation to provide a framework for reasoning with higher-order uncertainty. Our approach builds strongly on Haenni's system of probabilistic argumentation, but enhances it in several ways. First, we integrate it with deductive argumentation, both in terms of the representation of arguments and attacks, and in terms of utilizing abstract argumentation semantics for selecting some out of a set of possibly conflicting arguments. We show how our system can be adjusted to perform well under the so-called rationality postulates of formal argumentation. Second, we provide several notions of argument strength which are studied both meta-theoretically and empirically. In this way the paper contributes a formal model of reasoning with higher-order uncertainty with possible applications in artificial intelligence and human cognition.<\/jats:p>","DOI":"10.3389\/frai.2023.1133998","type":"journal-article","created":{"date-parts":[[2023,5,19]],"date-time":"2023-05-19T05:25:17Z","timestamp":1684473917000},"update-policy":"https:\/\/doi.org\/10.3389\/crossmark-policy","source":"Crossref","is-referenced-by-count":2,"title":["Evaluating and selecting arguments in the context of higher order uncertainty"],"prefix":"10.3389","volume":"6","author":[{"given":"Christian","family":"Stra\u00dfer","sequence":"first","affiliation":[]},{"given":"Lisa","family":"Michajlova","sequence":"additional","affiliation":[]}],"member":"1965","published-online":{"date-parts":[[2023,5,19]]},"reference":[{"key":"B1","first-page":"52","article-title":"\u201cCharacterizations and classifications of argumentative entailments,\u201d","volume-title":"Proceedings of KR","author":"Arieli","year":"2021"},{"key":"B2","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"73","DOI":"10.1080\/19462166.2014.1002536","article-title":"Sequent-based logical argumentation","volume":"6","author":"Arieli","year":"2015","journal-title":"Argument Comput."},{"key":"B3","first-page":"91","article-title":"\u201cOn minimality and consistency tolerance in logical argumentation frameworks,\u201d","volume-title":"Computational Models of Argument","author":"Arieli","year":"2020"},{"key":"B4","first-page":"157","article-title":"Abstract argumentation frameworks and their semantics","volume":"1","author":"Baroni","year":"2018","journal-title":"Handb. Formal Argument."},{"key":"B5","first-page":"63","article-title":"\u201cA critical assessment of Pollock's work on logic-based argumentation with suppositions,\u201d","volume-title":"Proceedings of the NMR","author":"Beirlaen","year":"2018"},{"key":"B6","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"203","DOI":"10.1016\/S0004-3702(01)00071-6","article-title":"A logic-based theory of deductive arguments","volume":"128","author":"Besnard","year":"2001","journal-title":"Artif. Intell."},{"key":"B7","first-page":"435","article-title":"A review of argumentation based on deductive arguments","volume":"1","author":"Besnard","year":"2018","journal-title":"Handb. Formal Argument."},{"key":"B8","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","DOI":"10.1007\/978-3-319-70766-2_21","article-title":"\u201cImprecise probabilities,\u201d","volume-title":"The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy","author":"Bradley","year":"2019"},{"key":"B9","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"568","DOI":"10.1016\/j.psychres.2012.03.053","article-title":"Decision making under ambiguity but not under risk is related to problem gambling severity","volume":"200","author":"Brevers","year":"2012","journal-title":"Psychiatry Res."},{"key":"B10","first-page":"487","article-title":"\u201cArgumentation Semantics as Formal Discussion,\u201d","volume-title":"Handbook of Formal Argumentation, Vol. 1","author":"Caminada","year":"2018"},{"key":"B11","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"286","DOI":"10.1016\/j.artint.2007.02.003","article-title":"On the evaluation of argumentation formalisms","volume":"171","author":"Caminada","year":"2007","journal-title":"Artif. Intell."},{"key":"B12","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"219","DOI":"10.1007\/s10838-019-09443-z","article-title":"A structured argumentation framework for modeling debates in the formal sciences","volume":"51","author":"Cramer","year":"2019","journal-title":"J. Gen. Philos. Sci."},{"key":"B13","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"58","DOI":"10.1007\/978-3-030-44638-3_4","article-title":"\u201cLogic programming, argumentation and human reasoning,\u201d","volume-title":"Logic and Argumentation","author":"Cramer","year":"2020"},{"key":"B14","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"2194","DOI":"10.3389\/fpsyg.2018.02194","article-title":"Disentangling risk and uncertainty: when risk-taking measures are not about risk","volume":"9","author":"De Groot","year":"2018","journal-title":"Front. Psychol."},{"key":"B15","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"148","DOI":"10.1016\/j.shpsa.2010.03.010","article-title":"Simulating peer disagreements","volume":"41","author":"Douven","year":"2010","journal-title":"Stud. History Philos. Sci. A"},{"key":"B16","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"755","DOI":"10.1093\/bjps\/axl022","article-title":"Generalizing the lottery paradox","volume":"57","author":"Douven","year":"2006","journal-title":"Brit. J. Philos. Sci."},{"key":"B17","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1007\/978-0-387-98197-0_10","article-title":"Assumption-based argumentation","author":"Dung","year":"2009","journal-title":"Argument. Artif. Intell."},{"key":"B18","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"321","DOI":"10.1016\/0004-3702(94)00041-X","article-title":"On the acceptability of arguments and its fundamental role in nonmonotonic reasoning, logic programming and n-person games","volume":"77","author":"Dung","year":"1995","journal-title":"Artif. Intell."},{"key":"B19","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1007\/s10670-021-00457-y","article-title":"The precautionary principle and expert disagreement","author":"Elkin","year":"2021","journal-title":"Erkenntnis"},{"key":"B20","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"260","DOI":"10.1111\/nous.12143","article-title":"Resolving peer disagreements through imprecise probabilities","volume":"52","author":"Elkin","year":"2016","journal-title":"No\u00fbs"},{"key":"B21","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"643","DOI":"10.2307\/1884324","article-title":"Risk, ambiguity, and the savage axioms","volume":"75","author":"Ellsberg","year":"1961","journal-title":"Q. J. Econ."},{"key":"B22","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"2882","DOI":"10.1016\/j.neuropsychologia.2009.06.014","article-title":"Dissociation of decision-making under ambiguity and decision-making under risk in patients with Parkinson's disease: a neuropsychological and psychophysiological study","volume":"47","author":"Euteneuer","year":"2009","journal-title":"Neuropsychologia"},{"key":"B23","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","DOI":"10.24963\/ijcai.2022\/362","article-title":"\u201cAbstract argumentation frameworks with marginal probabilities,\u201d","volume-title":"Proceedings of the Thirty-First International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence","author":"Fazzinga","year":"2022"},{"key":"B24","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"141","DOI":"10.1016\/0304-4068(89)90018-9","article-title":"\u201cMaxmin expected utility with non-unique prior,\u201d","volume":"18","author":"Gilboa","year":"2004","journal-title":"J. Math. Econ."},{"key":"B25","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"155","DOI":"10.1016\/j.jal.2007.11.006","article-title":"Probabilistic argumentation","volume":"7","author":"Haenni","year":"2009","journal-title":"J. Appl. Logic"},{"key":"B26","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"363","DOI":"10.1016\/j.tics.2020.01.004","article-title":"Argument quality in real world argumentation","volume":"24","author":"Hahn","year":"2020","journal-title":"Trends Cogn. Sci."},{"key":"B27","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"704","DOI":"10.1037\/0033-295X.114.3.704","article-title":"The rationality of informal argumentation: a Bayesian approach to reasoning fallacies","volume":"114","author":"Hahn","year":"2007","journal-title":"Psychol. Rev."},{"key":"B28","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"513","DOI":"10.1111\/nous.12367","article-title":"Higher-order evidence and losing one's conviction","volume":"56","author":"Henderson","year":"2021","journal-title":"No\u00fbs"},{"key":"B29","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"117","DOI":"10.3233\/978-1-61499-111-3-117","article-title":"Some foundations for probabilistic abstract argumentation","volume":"245","author":"Hunter","year":"2012","journal-title":"Comma"},{"key":"B30","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"47","DOI":"10.1016\/j.ijar.2012.08.003","article-title":"A probabilistic approach to modelling uncertain logical arguments","volume":"54","author":"Hunter","year":"2013","journal-title":"Int. J. Approximate Reason."},{"key":"B31","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"79","DOI":"10.1016\/j.ijar.2022.04.003","article-title":"Argument strength in probabilistic argumentation based on defeasible rules","volume":"146","author":"Hunter","year":"2022","journal-title":"Int. J. Approximate Reason"},{"key":"B32","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"103236","DOI":"10.1016\/j.artint.2020.103236","article-title":"Epistemic graphs for representing and reasoning with positive and negative influences of arguments","volume":"281","author":"Hunter","year":"2020","journal-title":"Artif. Intell."},{"key":"B33","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"565","DOI":"10.1613\/jair.5393","article-title":"Probabilistic reasoning with abstract argumentation frameworks","volume":"59","author":"Hunter","year":"2017","journal-title":"J. Artif. Intell. Res."},{"key":"B34","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"279","DOI":"10.1142\/S0218488501000831","article-title":"A logic for uncertain probabilities","volume":"9","author":"J\u00f8sang","year":"2001","journal-title":"Int. J. Uncertainty Fuzziness Knowledge Based Syst."},{"key":"B35","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"263","DOI":"10.2307\/1914185","article-title":"Prospect theory: an analysis of decision under risk","volume":"47","author":"Kahneman","year":"1979","journal-title":"Econometrica"},{"volume-title":"Probability and the Logic of Rational Belief","year":"1961","author":"Kyburg","key":"B36"},{"key":"B37","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"205","DOI":"10.1093\/analys\/25.6.205","article-title":"The paradox of the preface","volume":"25","author":"Makinson","year":"1965","journal-title":"Analysis"},{"volume-title":"The Enigma of Reason","year":"2017","author":"Mercier","key":"B38"},{"key":"B39","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"31","DOI":"10.1080\/19462166.2013.869766","article-title":"Theaspic+framework for structured argumentation: a tutorial","volume":"5","author":"Modgil","year":"2014","journal-title":"Argument Comput."},{"key":"B40","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"1127","DOI":"10.1093\/cje\/beab034","article-title":"Keynes and knight: risk-uncertainty distinctions, priority, coherence and change","volume":"45","author":"O'Donnell","year":"2021","journal-title":"Cambridge J. Econ."},{"key":"B41","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"838","DOI":"10.1016\/j.artint.2007.04.006","article-title":"Subjective logic and arguing with evidence","volume":"171","author":"Oren","year":"2007","journal-title":"Artif. Intell."},{"key":"B42","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","DOI":"10.1007\/978-94-007-5357-0_10","volume-title":"On Argument Strength","author":"Pfeifer","year":"2013"},{"key":"B43","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.48550\/arXiv.1703.03233","article-title":"Modeling the ellsberg paradox by argument strength","author":"Pfeifer","year":"2017","journal-title":"arXiv preprint arXiv:1703.03233"},{"key":"B44","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"229","DOI":"10.1007\/s13218-019-00608-y","article-title":"Cognitive argumentation for human syllogistic reasoning","volume":"33","author":"Saldanha","year":"2019","journal-title":"K\u00fcnstliche Intelligenz"},{"key":"B45","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","DOI":"10.23919\/ICIF.2018.8455455","article-title":"\u201cAre my arguments trustworthy? abstract argumentation with subjective logic,\u201d","volume-title":"2018 21st International Conference on Information Fusion (FUSION)","author":"Santini","year":"2018"},{"volume-title":"The Foundations of Statistics","year":"1972","author":"Savage","key":"B46"},{"volume-title":"The Uses of Argument","year":"1958","author":"Toulmin","key":"B47"},{"key":"B48","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"551","DOI":"10.1016\/j.psychres.2015.05.043","article-title":"Impaired decision making under ambiguity but not under risk in individuals with pathological buying-behavioral and psychophysiological evidence","volume":"229","author":"Trotzke","year":"2015","journal-title":"Psychiatry Res."},{"key":"B49","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"303","DOI":"10.1093\/logcom\/exu017","article-title":"Implementing crash-resistance and non-interference in logic-based argumentation","volume":"25","author":"Wu","year":"2014","journal-title":"J. Logic Comput."},{"key":"B50","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"17312","DOI":"10.1038\/srep17312","article-title":"Trait-related decision making impairment in obsessive-compulsive disorder: evidence from decision making under ambiguity but not decision making under risk","volume":"5","author":"Zhang","year":"2015","journal-title":"Sci. Rep."}],"container-title":["Frontiers in Artificial Intelligence"],"original-title":[],"link":[{"URL":"https:\/\/www.frontiersin.org\/articles\/10.3389\/frai.2023.1133998\/full","content-type":"unspecified","content-version":"vor","intended-application":"similarity-checking"}],"deposited":{"date-parts":[[2023,5,19]],"date-time":"2023-05-19T05:25:34Z","timestamp":1684473934000},"score":1,"resource":{"primary":{"URL":"https:\/\/www.frontiersin.org\/articles\/10.3389\/frai.2023.1133998\/full"}},"subtitle":[],"short-title":[],"issued":{"date-parts":[[2023,5,19]]},"references-count":50,"alternative-id":["10.3389\/frai.2023.1133998"],"URL":"https:\/\/doi.org\/10.3389\/frai.2023.1133998","relation":{},"ISSN":["2624-8212"],"issn-type":[{"type":"electronic","value":"2624-8212"}],"subject":[],"published":{"date-parts":[[2023,5,19]]},"article-number":"1133998"}}