doi:10.1017/S0269888913000325

Amgoud L., Cayrol C.2002. A reasoning model based on the production of acceptable arguments. Annals of Mathematics and Artificial Intelligence34(1–3), 197–215.

Amgoud L., Vesic S.2011. A new approach for preference-based argumentation frameworks. Annals of Mathematics and Artificial Intelligence63(2), 149–183.

Amgoud L., Bonnefon J.-F., Prade H.2005. An argumentation-based approach to multiple criteria decision. In 8th European Conference on Symbolic and Quantitative Approaches to Reasoning with Uncertainty, 269–280.

Amgoud L., Cayrol C., Lagasquie-Schiex M.-C.2004. On the bipolarity in argumentation frameworks. In 10th International Workshop on Non-Monotonic Reasoning, Whistler, BC, Canada, 1–9.

Amgoud L., Maudet N., Parsons S.2002. An argumentation-based semantics for agent communication languages. In 15th European Conference on Artificial Intelligence, Lyon, France, 38–42.

Amgoud L., Parsons S., Maudet N.2000. Arguments, dialogue, and negotiation. In 14th European Conference on Artificial Intelligence, Berlin, Germany, 338–342.

Atkinson K., Bench-Capon T. J. M.2007. Argumentation and standards of proof. In 11th International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Law, Stanford, California, USA, 107–116.

Baroni P., Cerutti F., Giacomin M., Guida G.2011. AFRA: Argumentation framework with recursive attacks. International Journal of Approximate Reasoning52(1), 19–37.

Bench-Capon T. J. M.2003. Persuasion in practical argument using value-based argumentation frameworks. Journal of Logic and Computation13(3), 429–448.

Bench-Capon T. J. M., Dunne P. E.2007. Argumentation in artificial intelligence. Artificial Intelligence171(10–15), 619–641.

Benferhat S., Dubois D., Kaci S., Prade H.2002. Bipolar representation and fusion of preferences on the possibilistic logic framework. In 8th International Conference on Principles of Knowledge Representation and Reasoning, Toulouse, France, 421–448.

Berge C.2001. Graphs and Hypergraphs. Dover Publications.

Besnard P., Hunter A.2001. A logic-based theory of deductive arguments. Artificial Intelligence128(1–2), 203–235.

Besnard P., Hunter A.2008. Elements of Argumentation. MIT Press.

Black E., Hunter A.2009. An inquiry dialogue system. Autonomous Agents and Multi-Agent Systems19(2), 173–209.

Boella G., Gabbay D. M., van der Torre L. W. N., Villata S.2010. Support in abstract argumentation. In 3rd International Conference on Computational Models of Argument, Baroni, P., Cerutti, F., Giacomin, M. & Simari, G. R. (eds). IOS Press, 111–122.

Boudhar I., Nouioua F., Risch V.2012. Handling preferences in argumentation frameworks with necessities. In 4th International Conference on Agents and Artificial Intelligence, Vilamoura, Algarve, Portugal, 340–345.

Brewka G., Woltran S.2010. Abstract dialectical frameworks. In 12th International Conference on the Principles of Knowledge Representation and Reasoning, Toronto, Ontario, Canada, 102–111.

Cayrol C., Lagasquie-Schiex M.-C.2005. On the acceptability of arguments in bipolar argumentation frameworks. In 8th European Conference on Symbolic and Quantitative Approaches to Reasoning with Uncertainty, Barcelona, Spain, 378–389.

Cayrol C., Lagasquie-Schiex M.-C.2007. Coalitions of arguments in bipolar argumentation frameworks. In 7th International Workshop on Computational Models of Natural Argument, Hyderabad, India, 14–20.

Cayrol C., Lagasquie-Schiex M.-C.2009. Bipolar abstract argumentation systems. In Argumentation in Artificial Intelligence, Simari, G. R. & Rahwan, I. (eds). Springer, 65–84.

Cayrol C., Lagasquie-Schiex M.-C.2010. Coalitions of arguments: a tool for handling bipolar argumentation frameworks. International Journal of Intelligent Systems25(1), 83–109.

Cayrol C., Lagasquie-Schiex M-C.2011. Bipolarity in argumentation graphs: towards a better understanding. In 5th International Conference on Scalable Uncertainty Management, Dayton, Ohio, USA, 137–148.

Chesñevar C. I., McGinnis J., Modgil S., Rahwan I., Reed C., Simari G. R., South M., Vreeswijk G., Willmott S.2006. Towards an argument interchange format. The Knowledge Engineering Review21(4), 293–316.

Cohen A., García A. J., Simari G. R.2011. Backing and undercutting in defeasible logic programming. In 11th European Conference on Symbolic and Quantitative Approaches to Reasoning with Uncertainty, Belfast, Northern Ireland, UK, 50–61.

Cohen A., García A. J., Simari G. R.2012. Backing and undercutting in abstract argumentation frameworks. In 7th International Symposium on Foundations of Information and Knowledge Systems, Kiel, Germany, 107–123.

Dubois D., Prade H.2005. A bipolar possibilistic representation of knowledge and preferences and its applications. In 6th International Workshop on Fuzzy Logic and Applications, Crema, Italy, 1–10.

Dubois D., Fargier H., Bonnefon J.-F.2008. On the qualitative comparison of decisions having positive and negative features. Journal of Artificial Intellicence Research32, 385–417.

Dung P. M.1995. On the acceptability of arguments and its fundamental role in nonmonotonic reasoning, logic programming and n-person games. Artificial Intelligence77(2), 321–358.

García A. J., Simari G. R.2004. Defeasible logic programming: an argumentative approach. Theory and Practice of Logic Programming4(1–2), 95–138.

Gelfond M., Lifschitz V.1988. The stable model semantics for logic programming. In ICLP/SLP, Seattle, Washington, USA, 1070–1080.

Gómez Lucero M. J., Chesñevar C. I., Simari G. R.2009. On the accrual of arguments in defeasible logic programming. In 21st International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence, Pasadena, California, USA, 804–809.

Martínez D. C., García A. J., Simari G. R.2006. On acceptability in abstract argumentation frameworks with an extended defeat relation. In 1st International Conference on Computational Models of Argument, Liverpool, UK, 273–278.

Martínez D. C., García A. J., Simari G. R.2007. Modelling well-structured argumentation lines. In 20th International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence, Hyderabad, India, 465–470.

Martínez D. C., García A. J., Simari G. R.2008a. Strong and weak forms of abstract argument defense. In 2nd International Conference on Computational Models of Argument, Toulouse, France, 216–227.

Martínez D. C., García A. J., Simari G. R.2008b. An abstract argumentation framework with varied-strength attacks. In 11th International Conference on Principles of Knowledge Representation and Reasoning, Sydney, NSW, Australia, 135–144.

Modgil S.2009. Reasoning about preferences in argumentation frameworks. Artificial Intelligence173(9–10), 901–934.

Nielsen S. H., Parsons S.2006. A generalization of Dung's abstract framework for argumentation: arguing with sets of attacking arguments. In Third International Workshop on Argumentation in Multi-Agent Systems, Hakodate, Japan, 54–73.

Nouioua F., Risch V.2010. Bipolar argumentation frameworks with specialized supports. In 22th IEEE International Conference on Tools with Artificial Intelligence, Arras, France, 215–218.

Nouioua F., Risch V.2011. Argumentation frameworks with necessities. In 5th International Conference on Scalable Uncertainty Management, Dayton, Ohio, USA, 163–176.

Oren N., Norman T. J.2008. Semantics for evidence-based argumentation. In 2nd International Conference on Computational Models of Argument, Toulouse, France, 276–284.

Parsons S., Sierra C., Jennings N. R.1998. Agents that reason and negotiate by arguing. Journal of Logic and Computation8(3), 261–292.

Pollock J. L.1987. Defeasible reasoning. Cognitive Science11(4), 481–518.

Pollock J. L.1991. Self-defeating arguments. Minds and Machines1, 367–392.

Prakken H.2005. A study of accrual of arguments, with applications to evidential reasoning. In 10th International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Law, Bologna, Italy, 85–94.

Prakken H.2009. An abstract framework for argumentation with structured arguments. Journal of Argument and Computation1, 93–124.

Prakken H., Sartor G.1997. Argument-based extended logic programming with defeasible priorities. Journal of Applied Non-Classical Logics7(1), 25–75.

Prakken H., Vreeswijk G.2002. Logics for defeasible argumentation. In Handbook of Philosophical Logic, Vol. 4, Gabbay, D. & Guenthner, F. (eds). Kluwer Academic Publishing, 218–319.

Rahwan I., Simari G. R.2009. Argumentation in Artificial Intelligence. Springer.

Rotstein N. D., Moguillansky M. O., Falappa M. A., García A. J., Simari G. R.2008. Argument theory change: revision upon warrant. In 2nd International Conference on Computational Models of Argument, Toulouse, France, 336–347.

Rotstein N. D., Moguillansky M. O., García A. J., Simari G. R.2010. A dynamic argumentation framework. In 3rd International Conference on Computational Models of Argument, Desenzano del Garda, Italy, 427–438.

Simari G. R., Loui R. P.1992. A mathematical treatment of defeasible reasoning and its implementation. Artificial Intelligence53(2–3), 125–157.

Toulmin S. E.1958. The Uses of Argument. Cambridge University Press.

Verheij B.1996. Rules, Reasons, Arguments. Formal Studies of argumentation and defeat. PhD thesis, Universiteit Maastricht.

Verheij B.2002. On the existence and multiplicity of extensions in dialectical argumentation. In 9th International Workshop on Non-Monotonic Reasoning, Toulouse, France, 416–425.

Verheij B.2003. DefLog: on the logical interpretation of prima facie justified assumptions. Journal of Logic and Computation13(3), 319–346.

Verheij B.2005. Evaluating arguments based on Toulmin's scheme. Argumentation19(3), 347–371.

Verheij B.2009. The Toulmin argument model in artificial intelligence. Or: how semi-formal, defeasible argumentation schemes creep into logic. In Argumentation in Artificial Intelligence, Rahwan, I. & Simari, G. R. (eds). Springer, 219–238.