  In many expert and everyday reasoning contexts it is very useful to reason on
the basis of defeasible assumptions. For instance, if the information at hand
is incomplete we often use plausible assumptions, or if the information is
conflicting we interpret it as consistent as possible. In this paper
sequent-based argumentation, a form of logical argumentation in which arguments
are represented by a sequent, is extended to incorporate assumptions. The
resulting assumptive framework is general, in that some other approaches to
reasoning with assumptions can adequately be represented in it. To exemplify
this, we show that assumption-based argumentation can be expressed in
assumptive sequent-based argumentation.
