<script type="text/javascript">
<!--
document.write('<div id="oa_widget"></div>');
document.write('<script type="text/javascript" src="https://www.openaire.eu/index.php?option=com_openaire&view=widget&format=raw&projectId=undefined&type=result"></script>');
-->
</script>
This paper discusses four major argumentation theoretical frameworks with respect to their use in support of explainable artificial intelligence (XAI). We consider these frameworks as useful tools for both system-centred and usercentred XAI. The former is concerned with the generation of explanations for decisions taken by AI systems, while the latter is concerned with the way explanations are given to users and received by them.
Dialogue Theory, Inference Anchoring Theory, Pragma-dialectical Theory, Abstract Argumentation Framework
Dialogue Theory, Inference Anchoring Theory, Pragma-dialectical Theory, Abstract Argumentation Framework
citations This is an alternative to the "Influence" indicator, which also reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically). | 0 | |
popularity This indicator reflects the "current" impact/attention (the "hype") of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network. | Average | |
influence This indicator reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically). | Average | |
impulse This indicator reflects the initial momentum of an article directly after its publication, based on the underlying citation network. | Average |