@proceedings {Strasser,
	title = {Dynamic Derivations for Sequent-Based Deductive Argumentation},
	journal = {COMMA 2014},
	volume = {Computational Models of Argument},
	year = {2014},
	pages = {89{\textendash}100},
	abstract = {<p>We introduce a general approach for representing and reasoning with argumentation-based systems. In our framework arguments are represented by Gentzen-style sequents, attacks (conflicts) between arguments are represented by sequent elimination rules, and deductions are made by dynamic proof systems. This framework accommodates different languages and logics in which arguments may be represented, supports a variety of attack relations, and tolerates dynamic changes in the argumentation setting by revising derivations of assertions in light of new information.</p>},
	author = {Stra{\ss}er, Christian and Arieli, Ofer},
	editor = {Parsons, Simon and Oren, Nir and Reed, Chris and Cerutti, Federico}
}
@article {Straser2014,
	title = {Sequent-Based Argumentation for Normative Reasoning},
	journal = {Deontic Logic and Normative Systems: Lecture Notes in Computer Science},
	volume = {8554},
	year = {2014},
	pages = {224{\textendash}240},
	abstract = {<p>In this paper we present an argumentative approach to normative reasoning. Special attention is paid to normative conflicts, contrary-to-duty and specificity cases. These are modeled by means of argumentative attacks. For this, we adopt a recently proposed frame- work for logical argumentation in which arguments are generated by a sequent calculus of a given base logic (Arieli, CLIMA2013, pp.6985), and use an intuitionistic variant of stan- dard deontic logic as our base logic. Argumentative attacks are realized by elimination rules that allow to discharge specific sequents. We demonstrate our system by means of various well-known benchmark examples.</p>},
	author = {Stra{\ss}er, Christian and Arieli, Ofer}
}
