Argüman

Argüman is a free and open source software for collective structured argumentation and argument analysis via argumentation graphs or argument maps in which the type of connections can be specified.[2][3][4][5][6] It allows users to create collaborative "semantic maps" of arguments in well structured tree formats and share them with an audience and potential participants.[7][3][8] The website implementing the software is down as of 2023. There also is a mobile version of the tool. The project was started, in 2014, and largely built by developers in Turkey.[1]

Argüman
Repositorygithub.com/arguman/arguman.org
Written inPython / Django[1]
LicenseThe license appears to be the GNU General Public License
Example Argüman argument map

Some studies used or investigated excerpts of argumentations on the platform.[9][10] Unlike the larger and functional alternative Kialo, which is structured using only 'Pro' and 'Con' relations,[2] argüman arguments are structured by three types of premises – 'because', 'but', and 'however'.[3] As of the latest version, debates are presented in their entirety as a large tree which may be harder to navigate than other formats – for instance, trees "can become extremely dense, and the interface does not make it obvious which arguments the user should pay attention to".[2] Users can also flag arguments for fallacies. The site also had a Turkish-language subdomain.[11]

A researcher suggested the concept of the Semantic Web-interoperability could be useful for argumentative structures on the Web, going beyond the conventional flat structures of discussions and lack of characterizations of their components as implemented in argüman.[12] There is research into how to automatically use these collaborative argumentation graphs, which is a "very active" topic in Artificial Intelligence.[4] There also is research into applying conclusion-making methods to the debates or their data such as bipolar weighted argumentation frameworks – this could be a way to find out what the current conclusion of debates like "Computer Science is not actually a science" is.[13] A study suggests it could be useful for the development of critical thinking skills.[14]

See also

References
  1. "AMENDMENT: Arguman.org". archive.fosdem.org. Retrieved 14 June 2023.
  2. Yuan, An (2018). Collective debate (Thesis). Massachusetts Institute of Technology. hdl:1721.1/122893. Retrieved 13 June 2023.
  3. Pührer, Jörg (2017). "ArgueApply: A Mobile App for Argumentation". Logic Programming and Nonmonotonic Reasoning. Lecture Notes in Computer Science. Vol. 10377. Springer International Publishing. pp. 250–262. doi:10.1007/978-3-319-61660-5_23. ISBN 978-3-319-61659-9.
  4. "Argumentation Ranking Semantics based on Propagation". Retrieved 13 June 2023.
  5. Gargouri, Anis; Konieczny, Sébastien; Marquis, Pierre; Vesic, Srdjan (2021). "On a Notion of Monotonic Support for Bipolar Argumentation Frameworks". {{cite journal}}: Cite journal requires |journal= (help)
  6. Jeuris, Steven (2018). "Socratrees: Exploring the Design of Argument Technology for Layman Users". arXiv:1812.04478 [cs.HC].
  7. Antonio, Cordón García, José (1 January 2018). Lectura, sociedad y redes: Colaboración, visibilidad y recomendación en el ecosistema del libro (in Spanish). Marcial Pons. ISBN 978-84-9123-626-9.{{cite book}}: CS1 maint: multiple names: authors list (link)
  8. "Argüman – About". Archived from the original on 2021-01-24.
  9. "Gradual Semantics Accounting for Similarity between Arguments" (PDF). Proceedings of the Sixteenth International Conference on Principles of Knowledge Representation and Reasoning.
  10. Hoffmann, Michael H. G. (1 June 2018). "The Elusive Notion of "Argument Quality"". Argumentation. 32 (2): 213–240. doi:10.1007/s10503-017-9442-x. ISSN 1572-8374. S2CID 254261703.
  11. Uzelgun, Mehmet Ali; Kucukural, Onder; Oruc, Raluni (2020). "Four Approaches in Argumentation Analysis". Connectist: Istanbul University Journal of Communication Sciences: 265–297. doi:10.26650/CONNECTIST2020-0666. S2CID 243065887. Retrieved 9 September 2023.
  12. Vetere, Guido (30 June 2018). "L'impossibile necessità delle piattaforme sociali decentralizzate". DigitCult - Scientific Journal on Digital Cultures. 3 (1): 41–50. doi:10.4399/97888255159096.
  13. Delobelle, Jérôme (12 December 2017). Ranking-based Semantics for Abstract Argumentation (phdthesis). Université d'Artois.
  14. "Bir Eleştirel Düşünme Çevrimiçi Aracı Olarak Arguman.org" (PDF). Retrieved 9 September 2023.
Wikimedia Commons has media related to Argüman.
This article is issued from Wikipedia. The text is licensed under Creative Commons - Attribution - Sharealike. Additional terms may apply for the media files.