• H. Prakken, Some reflections on two current trends in formal argumentation. In A. Artikis, R. Craven, N.K. Cicekli, B. Sadighi & K. Stathis (eds.) Logic Programs, Norms and Action. Essays in Honour of Marek J. Sergot on the Occasion of his 60th Birthday, pp. 249--272. Berlin/Heidelberg: Springer, 2012. [PDF]

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 subset-minimal in (classically) implying its conclusion. Otherwise the argument with premises p and q and conclusion p excludes this counterexample. The classical-logic instantiation of ASPIC+ with this additional minimality condition is instead in the following publication proven to satisfy these rationality postulates:

• S.J. Modgil & H. Prakken, A general account of argumentation with preferences. Artificial Intelligence 2013, in press. [PDF]. (Version at AI Journal homepage).