A Normal Form for Argumentation Frameworks
نویسندگان
چکیده
We study formal argumentation frameworks as introduced by Dung (1995). We show that any such argumentation framework can be syntactically augmented into a normal form (having a simplified attack relation), preserving the semantic properties of original arguments. An argumentation framework is in normal form if no argument attacks a conflicting pair of arguments. An augmentation of an argumentation framework is obtained by adding new arguments and changing the attack relation such that the acceptability status of original arguments is maintained in the new framework. Furthermore, we define join-normal semantics leading to augmentations of the joined argumentation frameworks. Also, a rewriting technique which transforms in cubic time a given argumentation framework into a normal form is devised.
منابع مشابه
On the Relative Expressiveness of Argumentation Frameworks, Normal Logic Programs and Abstract Dialectical Frameworks
We analyse the expressiveness of the two-valued semantics of abstract argumentation frameworks, normal logic programsargumentation frameworks, normal logic programs and abstract dialectical frameworks. By expressiveness we mean the ability to encode a desired set of two-valued interpretations over a given propositional signature using only atoms from that signature. While the computational comp...
متن کاملDoing Argumentation using Theories in Graph Normal Form
We explore some links between abstract argumentation, logic and kernels in digraphs. Viewing argumentation frameworks as propositional theories in graph normal form, we observe that the stable semantics for argumentation can be given equivalently in terms of satisfaction and logical consequence in classical logic. We go on to show that the complete semantics can be formulated using Lukasiewicz ...
متن کاملASPARTIX: Implementing Argumentation Frameworks Using Answer-Set Programming
The system ASPARTIX is a tool for computing acceptable extensions for a broad range of formalizations of Dung’s argumentation framework and generalizations thereof. ASPARTIX relies on a fixed disjunctive datalog program which takes an instance of an argumentation framework as input, and uses the answer-set solver DLV for computing the type of extension specified by the user.
متن کاملAnswer-set programming encodings for argumentation frameworks
We present reductions from Dung’s argumentation framework (AF) and generalizations thereof to logic programs under the answer-set semantics. The reduction is based on a fixed disjunctive datalog program (the interpreter) and its input which is the only part depending on the AF to process. We discuss the reductions, which are the basis for the system ASPARTIX in detail and show their adequacy in...
متن کاملThe Relative Expressiveness of Abstract Argumentation and Logic Programming
We analyze the relative expressiveness of the two-valued semantics of abstract argumentation frameworks, normal logic programs and abstract dialectical frameworks. By expressiveness we mean the ability to encode a desired set of two-valued interpretations over a given propositional vocabulary A using only atoms from A. While the computational complexity of the two-valued model existence problem...
متن کامل