A correction of:
The counterexample to satisfaction by ASPIC+instantiated PAFs of the rationality postulates of subargument closure and indirect consistency presented at page 11 only holds if the set of premises of arguments is required to be subsetminimal in (classically) implying its conclusion. Otherwise the argument with premises p and q and conclusion p excludes this counterexample. The classicallogic instantiation of ASPIC+ with this additional minimality condition is instead in the following publication proven to satisfy these rationality postulates:
