{"id":"W2055778401","doi":"10.1016/j.jal.2008.07.002","title":"Formalization of the ad hominem argumentation scheme","year":2008,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"Journal of Applied Logic","topic":"Multi-Agent Systems and Negotiation","field":"Computer Science","cited_by":14,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":false,"ca_institutions":"University of Windsor","funders":"","keywords":"Argumentation theory; Argument (complex analysis); Computer science; Scheme (mathematics); Defeasible estate; Defeasible reasoning; Matching (statistics); Artificial intelligence; Identification (biology); Set (abstract data type); Epistemology; Theoretical computer science; Natural language processing; Mathematics; Programming language; Philosophy","routes":{"ca_aff":true,"ca_fund":false,"ca_venue":false,"about_ca":false,"invisible_to_affiliation_only":false},"retraction":null,"screen":null,"direct_labels":[],"prediction":{"model_version":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.0002443372,0.00005324372,0.0001114272,0.0000613439,0.00007615532,0.0000136003,0.0003018797,0.00003265074,0.000009108775],"category_scores_gemma":[0.0000122008,0.00003261179,0.00006289314,0.0001975622,0.00001740151,0.0002317155,0.00003750469,0.00006295096,0.000004711628],"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.0000299615,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.00003968316,"about_ca_topic_candidate":false,"about_ca_topic_consensus":false,"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.000001519772,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":7.608381e-7,"domain_scores_codex":[0.9991906,0.0000200297,0.0003617168,0.00006307256,0.0002930492,0.00007153493],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9990345,0.00002014778,0.0006781816,0.0001415243,0.0001012265,0.00002441113],"domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"study_design_codex":"bench_or_experimental","study_design_gemma":"bench_or_experimental","study_design_scores_codex":[0.0001962942,0.0007491422,0.02202361,0.0002119198,0.0001784483,0.00002313461,0.01564853,0.01508276,0.6194201,0.2935793,0.009952176,0.02293471],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.006939886,0.0006759246,0.4178146,0.0002159659,0.00007074329,0.0007127174,0.0007529451,0.1098263,0.4357189,0.0184273,0.008212551,0.0006321667],"study_design_candidate":"bench_or_experimental","study_design_consensus":"bench_or_experimental","genre_codex":"empirical","genre_gemma":"empirical","genre_scores_codex":[0.5950014,0.00007877603,0.4023921,0.0002676893,0.0004003928,0.0001627189,3.835949e-7,0.000009797249,0.00168673],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.9865068,0.00003582451,0.01323725,0.0001227968,0.00005236565,0.000001505687,4.409785e-7,0.000002385562,0.00004062446],"genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":"empirical","teacher_disagreement_score":0.395791,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.132987,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated"},"machine_scores":{"provisional":true,"baseline":true,"maturity_gate_passed":false,"score_opus":0.02786709962843172,"score_gpt":0.2324495649588235,"score_spread":0.2045824653303918,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline","note":"Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed). Scores rank; they never assert a category."}}