The phrase "argumentation scheme" is correct and usable in written English.
It can be used in discussions about reasoning, logic, or the structure of arguments in various contexts, such as academic writing or debate.
Example: "In her paper, she analyzed the argumentation scheme used by the author to support their thesis."
Alternatives: "argument structure" or "reasoning framework".
Finally, we present a pilot Semantic Web-based system, ArgDF, through which users can create arguments using different argumentation schemes and can query arguments using a Semantic Web query language.
The largest class in Walton's classification is the one associated with argumentation schemes and ad-arguments, and these are the ones that he considers as the most central fallacies.
First, we extend the recently proposed Argument Interchange Format (AIF) to express arguments with a structure based on Walton's theory of argumentation schemes.
ArgDF also enables users to create new argumentation schemes.
Carneades enables critical questions of argumentation schemes to be modeled as additional premises, using premise types to capture the varying effect on the burden of proof of different kinds of questions.
Paralogisms are instances of identifiable argumentation schemes, but sophisms are not.
Duschl (2007) conducted a study by adopting Walton's (1996) argumentation schemes which was a framework that could address most of the five criteria put forth by Sampson and Clark (2008).
The theory behind this module was borrowed from van Eemeren and colleagues [ 36]. 3) Argument schemes Argument schemes An argument scheme is a strategy of argumentation that reveals the link between the premises and a standpoint to be defended [ 42].
For content selection and organization, we devised an argumentation strategy based on guidelines from argumentation theory.
This web-based collaborative argumentation system provides tools for supporting collaborative argumentation.
