Mapping Complex Debates: A Case Study on Austhink Rationale

Ciprian Cucu ()
Additional contact information
Ciprian Cucu: „1 Decembrie 1918” University, Alba Iulia, Romania

Annals of the University of Petrosani, Economics, 2013, vol. 13, issue 2, 31-36

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.

Keywords: argumentation; computer systems; learning (search for similar items in EconPapers)
JEL-codes: D83 L86 (search for similar items in EconPapers)
Date: 2013
References: View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations:

Downloads: (external link)
http://upet.ro/annals/economics/pdf/2013/part2/Cucu_C.pdf (application/pdf)

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:pet:annals:v:13:y:2013:i:2:p:31-36

Access Statistics for this article

More articles in Annals of the University of Petrosani, Economics from University of Petrosani, Romania
Bibliographic data for series maintained by Imola Driga ().