First, we extend the recently proposed Argument Interchange Format (AIF) to express arguments with a structure based on Walton's theory of argumentation schemes.
The procedures are adapted from (variants of) corresponding procedures for computing the credulous admissible semantics for assumption-based argumentation, proposed in [P.M. Dung, R.A. Kowalski, F. Toni, Dialectic proof procedures for assumption-based, admissible argumentation, Artificial Intelligence 170 (2006) 114 159].
Several systems of semantics have been proposed for structured argumentation with priorities.
This study proposed how collective argumentation could be developed through students' questions, cognitive procedures (reasoning and knowledge) as well as argument constructions.
The third paper by Le and Pinkwart, Evaluation of a Question Generation Approach Using Semantic Web for Supporting Argumentation, proposed an approach to generate questions used for stimulating student active discussions.
Finally, this study proposed suggestions related to argumentation research and science instruction counteracting students' pseudoscientific beliefs.
In this paper, we extend the theory of abstract argumentation systems proposed by Vreeswijk (1997).
Other scholars like Klahr and Dunbar from the information processing perspective, Kuhn et al. from the epistemology perspective, and Osborne from the argumentation perspective proposed different interpreting on scientific reasoning (Klahr and Dunbar 1988; D. Kuhn et al. 2008; Osborne 2013).
One direction of research in abstract argumentation was devoted to develop the "right" forms of semantics (see, e.g., [8 10] where properties for argumentation semantics are proposed and evaluated).
In order to cope with this limitation, many scholars have proposed to adopt on-line argumentation platforms to improve information visualization, organization and reuse.
