Development of Classification and Catalog of Software for Modeling Argumentation and Deliberative Reasoning

Elena Lisanyuk, Dmitry Prokudin

Abstract


As a result of the conducted research, we propose an approach to the development of a comprehensive classification of software applications, software and information systems designed for modeling and representation of argumentation, broad-based deliberative reasoning, support of decision-making processes and the formation of argumentation and critical thinking skills. The classification is based on the corpus of criteria developed as a result of this study, which determine the essential characteristics and functional features of such software, which must be taken into account when developing software for modeling argumentation, especially software with the function of evaluating arguments and finding solutions. The classification takes into account different types of justifications and counterarguments, the features of dialogues where arguments are given, and the structure of arguments of different types, including deliberative arguments. Based on the developed classification, a catalog is proposed in which descriptions of the corresponding software are made using the DCMES metadata scheme, which in the application plan is aimed at creating an electronic catalog in a machine-readable format. We have proposed a palliative solution for implementing the catalog in a machine-readable format. The proposed approach aims not only to support a rational and reasonable choice of software systems and applications for use in solving user tasks in the academic, research and educational communities, but also to serve as a tool for the prompt selection of appropriate software based on a search for metadata describing it.

Full Text:

PDF (Russian)

References


O. Pochepskiy, Vidy programmnogo obespecheniya: kakie byvayut tipy, klassifikatsiya, primery, Сleverence. October, 7, 2019 [Online]. Available: https://www.cleverence.ru/articles/auto-busines/vidy-programmnogo-obespecheniya-kakie-byvayut-tipy-klassifikatsiya-primery/

Software Classification. eduCBA [Online]. Available: https://www.educba.com/software-classification/ (accessed date: 10.04.2022).

A.V. Yeres, “Classification of software and its features”, Postulat, no. 1(27), p. 130, 2018. [Online]. Available: http://e-postulat.ru/index.php/Postulat/article/view/1183

R. Andsbjerg, D. Vesset, IDC's Worldwide Software Taxonomy, 2022. [Online]. Available: https://www.idc.com/getdoc.jsp?containerId= US48990921

Computing Classification System. https://dl.acm.org/ccs (дата обращения: 10.04.2022).

Market Definitions and Methodology: Software. Gartner, 2021. [Online]. Available: https://www.gartner.com/en/documents/3906823.

Edinyy reestr rossiyskikh programm dlya elektronnykh vychislitel'nykh mashin i baz dannykh, [Online]. Available: https://reestr.digital.gov.ru.

Elena N. Lisanyuk, Dmitry E. Prokudin

Katalog sovmestimosti otechestvennogo PO, ARPP «Otechestvennyy soft», [Online]. Available: https://catalog.arppsoft.ru.

Svidetel'stvo № 2020665092. Programmnyy kompleks dlya modelirovaniya i analiza argumentatsii v nauchno-populyarnykh tekstakh ArgNetBank Studio: № 2020663982: zayavl. 09.11.2020: opubl. 20.11.2020, Zagorul'ko Yu.A., Sidorova E.A., Seryy A.S., Borovikova O.I., Domanov O.A., Kononenko I.S., Shestakov V.K., Akhmadeeva I.R. 1 p.

S. Buckingham Shum, A. Okada, “Knowledge Cartography for Open Sensemaking Communities”, Journal of Interactive Media in Education, no. 1, Art. 10, 2008, doi: 10.5334/2008-10.

O. Noroozi, A. Weinberger, H.J.A. Biemans, M. Mulder, M. Chizari, “Argumentation-Based Computer Supported Collaborative Learning (ABCSCL): A synthesis of 15 years of research”, Educational Research Review, vol. 7, iss. 2, pp. 79-106, 2012, doi: 10.1016/j.edurev.2011.11.006.

O. Scheuer, B. McLaren, F. Loll, N. Pinkwart. “Automated Analysis and Feedback Techniques to Support and Teach Argumentation: A Survey”, Educational Technologies for Teaching Argumentation Skills, Pinkwart, N., McLaren, B. (eds), United Arab Emirates: Bentham Science Publishers, Sharjah, 2012, pp. 71-124, doi: 10.2174/978160805015411201010071.

E. Lehtinen, K. Hakkarainen, L. Lipponen, M. Rahikainen, H. Muukkonen, “Computer Supported Collaborative Learning: A Review”, JHGI Giesbers Rep. Educ, no. 10, pp. 1–58, 1999.

M. Davies, A. Barnett, T. van Gelder, “Using Computer-Aided Argument Mapping to Teach Reasoning”, A. Blair (Ed.). Studies in Critical Thinking: 2nd Edition. Windsor, ON: WSIA, Studies in Argumentation, vol. 8, pp. 131–176, 2019.

B.B. Schwarz, A. Glassner, “The role of floor control and of ontology in argumentative activities with discussion-based tools”, Computer Supported Learning, no. 2, pp. 449–478, 2007, doi: 10.1007/s11412-007-9024-2.

Visualizing Argumentation. Software Tools for Collaborative and Educational Sense-Making, P.A. Kirschner, S.J. Buckingham Shum, C.S. Carr (eds.). London: Springer, 2003, doi: 10.1007/978-1-4471-0037-9.

van den Braak S.W., van Oostendorp H., Prakken H., Vreeswijk G.A. A Critical Review of Argument Visualization Tools: Do Users Become Better Reasoners // ECAI-2006 Workshop on Computational Models of Natural Argument (CMNA VI), 28 August 2006, Riva del Garda, Italy. 2006.

B. Verheij, “Argumentation support software: boxes-and-arrows and beyond”, Law, Probability and Risk, vol. 6, iss. 1-4, pp. 187–208. 2007, doi: 10.1093/lpr/mgm017.

N. Benn, A. Macintosh, “Argument Visualization for eParticipation: Towards a Research Agenda and Prototype Tool”, Electronic Participation. ePart 2011, Tambouris E., Macintosh A., de Bruijn H. (eds), Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol. 6847. Berlin, Heidelberg: Springer, 2011, pp. 60-73, doi: 10.1007/978-3-642-23333-3_6.

A. Karamanou, N. Loutas, K. Tarabanis. “ArgVis: Structuring Political Deliberations Using Innovative Visualisation Technologies”, Electronic Participation. ePart 2011, Tambouris E., Macintosh A., de Bruijn H. (eds), Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol. 6847. Berlin, Heidelberg: Springer, 2011, pp. 87-98, doi: 10.1007/978-3-642-23333-3_8.

L. Iandoli, I. Quinto, A. De Liddo, S. Buckingham Shum, “Socially augmented argumentation tools: Rationale, design and evaluation of a debate dashboard”, International Journal of Human-Computer Studies, vol. 72, iss. 3. pp. 298-319, 2014. doi: 10.1016/j.ijhcs.2013.08.006.

A. Al-Shehhi, Argument Visualization and Narrative Approaches for Collaborative Spatial Decision Making and Knowledge Construction, Thesis for Master of Science in Computing and Information Science, Masdar Institute of Science and Technology, 2012.

M. Thimm, S. Villata, “The first international competition on computational models of argumentation: Results and analysis”, Artificial Intelligence, vol. 252, pp. 267-294, 2017, doi: 10.1016/j.artint.2017.08.006.

D. Khartabil, S. Wells, J. Kennedy, “Large-scale Argument Visualization (LSAV)”, EuroVis 2016 (Posters), The Eurographics Association, 2016. pp. 65-67, doi: 10.2312/eurp.20161143.

F. Loll, N. Pinkwart, “Collaboration Support in Argumentation Systems for Education via Flexible Architectures”, Ninth IEEE International Conference on Advanced Learning Technologies, 2009, pp. 707-708, doi: 10.1109/ICALT.2009.55.

F. Loll, O. Scheuer, B.M. McLaren, N. Pinkwart, Learning to Argue Using Computers – A View from Teachers, Researchers, and System Developers, Intelligent Tutoring Systems. ITS 2010, Aleven V., Kay J., Mostow J. (eds), Lecture Notes in Computer Science. Berlin, Heidelberg: Springer, vol. 6095, pp. 377-379, 2010, doi: 10.1007/978-3-642-13437-1_76.

F. Loll, N. Pinkwart, “LASAD: Flexible representations for computer-based collaborative argumentation”, International Journal of Human-Computer Studies, vol. 71, iss. 1, pp. 91-109, 2013, doi: 10.1016/j.ijhcs.2012.04.002.

O. Scheuer, F. Loll, N. Pinkwart, “Computer-supported argumentation: A review of the state of the art:, Computer Supported Learning, vol. 5, pp. 43–102, 2010, doi: 10.1007/s11412-009-9080-x.

F. Loll, N. Pinkwart, O. Scheuer, B.M. McLaren, “How Tough should it be? Simplifying the Development of Argumentation Systems Using a Configurable Platform”, Educational Technologies for Teaching Argumentation Skills, Pinkwart, N., McLaren, B. (eds). United Arab Emirates: Bentham Science Publishers, Sharjah, 2012. pp. 169-197, doi: 10.2174/978160805015411201010169.

G.V. Karpov, E.N. Lisanyuk, “Practical philosophy of teaching argumentation and critical thinking”, Professional education in the modern world, vol. 10, no. 3, pp. 3959–3970. 2020, doi: 10.15372/PEMW20200307.

E.A. Sidorova, I.R. Akhmadeeva, Yu.A. Zagorulko, A.S. Sery, V.K. Shestakov, “Research platform for the study of argumentation in popular science discourse”, Ontology of designing, vol. 10, no. 4(38), pp. 489-502. 2020, doi: 10.18287/2223-9537-2020-10-4-489-502.

V. Usman, R. Britto, J. Börstler, E. Mendes, “Taxonomies in software engineering: A Systematic mapping study and a revised taxonomy development method”, Information and Software Technology, vol. 85, pp. 43-59, 2017, doi: 10.1016/j.infsof.2017.01.006.

E. Lisanyuk, D. Prokudin, “Software for the representation of deliberative argumentation: the conceptual foundations and the properties of classification and use”, International Journal of Open Information Technologies, vol. 8, no. 11, 2020, pp. 49-56, doi: 10.25559/INJOIT.2307-8162.08.202011.49-56.

E. Lisanyuk, D. Prokudin, “Study of Conceptual Bases of Software Functioning for the Representation of Deliberative Argumentation”, CEUR Workshop Proceedings, Vol. 2813, pp. 22-31, 2021 [Online]. Available: http://ceur-ws.org/Vol-2813/rpaper02.pdf.

ISO/IEC 12182 Systems and software engineering — Framework for categorization of IT systems and software, and guide for applying it. 2nd edition. JTC 1/SC 7 Software and systems engineering. 2015 [Online]. Available: https://www.iso.org/standard/63611.html.

GOST R ISO/MEK TO 12182-2002. Informatsionnaya tekhnologiya. Klassifikatsiya programmnykh sredstv. – Vved. 11.06.2002 g., Razrabotan VNIIstandart Gosstandarta Rossii, Moskva: I PK Izdatel'stvo standartov, 2002.

E. Lisanyuk, D. Prokudin, “Crucial aspects of software development for modeling deliberative argumentation”, International Journal of Open Information Technologies, vol. 9, no. 12, pp. 68-82, 2021, doi: 10.25559/INJOIT.2307-8162.09.202112.68-82.

E. Lisanyuk, D. Prokudin, “Software for Modeling Deliberative Argumentation: Requirements and Criteria”, CEUR Workshop Proceedings, vol. 3090, pp. 11-23, 2022 [Online]. Available: http://ceur-ws.org/Vol-3090/paper01.pdf.

E. Lisanyuk, D. Prokudin, “Programmnoe obespechenie dlya modelirovaniya argumentatsii: klassifikatsiya i sravnitel'nyy analiz”, Internet i sovremennoe obshhestvo: sbornik tezisov dokladov, Trudy XX Mezhdunarodnoj ob’edinennoj nauchnoj konferencii «Internet and Modern Society» (IMS-2017), St.Peterburg, June, 21–23, 2017, SPb., ITMO University, 2017, pp. 11-13 [Online]. Available: http://ojs.ifmo.ru/index.php/IMS/article/view/516.

O. Kononova, D. Prokudin, “Research possibility of developing a machine-readable catalog of computer programs and tools for extracting and analyzing contextual knowledge”, Information society: education, science, culture and technologies of the future, no 4. pp. 42-57, 2020, doi: 10.17586/2587-8557-2020-4-42-57.

O. Kononova, D. Prokudin, A. Timofeeva, “Software catalogue for scientific context explication”, Ibero-American WWW / Internet Conference 2020: 19, Lisbon, Virtual, 18–20 November 2020. Lisbon, Virtual, 2020, pp. 61-67.


Refbacks

  • There are currently no refbacks.


Abava  Absolutech Convergent 2022

ISSN: 2307-8162