Credulous and Skeptical Argument Games for Complete Semantics in Conflict Resolution based Argumentation
نویسنده
چکیده
Argumentation is one of the most popular approaches of defining a non-monotonic formalism and several argumentation based semantics were proposed for defeasible logic programs. Recently, a new approach based on notions of conflict resolutions was proposed, however with declarative semantics only. This paper gives a more procedural counterpart by developing skeptical and credulous argument games for complete semantics and soundness and completeness theorems for both games are provided. After that, distribution of defeasible logic program into several contexts is investigated and both argument games are adapted for multicontext system.
منابع مشابه
Computational Properties of Resolution-based Grounded Semantics
In the context of Dung’s theory of abstract argumentation frameworks, the recently introduced resolution-based grounded semantics features the unique property of fully complying with a set of general requirements, only partially satisfied by previous literature proposals. This paper contributes to the investigation of resolution-based grounded semantics by analyzing its computational properties...
متن کاملA Gentle Introduction to Argumentation Semantics
This document presents an overview of some of the standard semantics for formal argumentation, including Dung’s notions of grounded, preferred, complete and stable semantics, as well as newer notions like Caminada’s semi-stable semantics and Dung, Mancarella and Toni’s ideal semantics. These semantics will be treated both in their original extension-based form, as well as in the form of argumen...
متن کاملCEGARTIX v2017-3-13: A SAT-Based Counter-Example Guided Argumentation Reasoning Tool
We present CEGARTIX, version 2017-3-13, for the International Competition on Computational Models of Argumentation (ICCMA) 2017. Main changes are the addition of support for more reasoning tasks, relying on variations of existing Boolean encodings. The tool CEGARTIX is now capable of deciding credulous and skeptical acceptance, and enumeration of all (or up to a pre-specified bound) extensions ...
متن کاملOn the Complexity of Computing the Justification Status of an Argument
Motivation We adress the problem of: Determining the acceptance status of an argument in abstract argumentation (Given a semantics for computing the extensions). Motivation We adress the problem of: Determining the acceptance status of an argument in abstract argumentation (Given a semantics for computing the extensions). Traditional: Skeptical and/or Credulous Acceptance. Wu and Caminada recen...
متن کاملSequent-based logical argumentation
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 according to Dung-style skeptical or credulous semantics. This framework accommodates different languages and logics in wh...
متن کاملذخیره در منابع من
با ذخیره ی این منبع در منابع من، دسترسی به آن را برای استفاده های بعدی آسان تر کنید
برای دانلود متن کامل این مقاله و بیش از 32 میلیون مقاله دیگر ابتدا ثبت نام کنید
ثبت ناماگر عضو سایت هستید لطفا وارد حساب کاربری خود شوید
ورودعنوان ژورنال:
- CoRR
دوره abs/1404.6883 شماره
صفحات -
تاریخ انتشار 2014