Inductive Defense for Sceptical Semantics of Extended Argumentation
نویسندگان
چکیده
An abstract argumentation framework may have many extensions. Which extension should be adopted as the semantics depends on the sceptical attitudes of the reasoners. Different degrees of scepticism lead to different semantics ranging from the grounded extension as the most sceptical semantics to preferred extensions as the least sceptical semantics. Extending abstract argumentation to allow attacks to be attacked, subjects attacks to argumentation and hence gives rise to a new dimension of scepticism for characterizing how sceptically attacks are accepted. In this paper we present a semantics based on the notion of inductive (grounded) defense of attacks which is sceptical towards the acceptance of attacks but credulous towards the acceptance of arguments. We show that the semantics preserves fundamental properties of abstract argumentation including the monotonicity of the characteristic function. We further show that any extension of the semantics proposed by Gabbay; Baroni, Cerutti, Giacomin and Guida1; and Modgil contains a sceptical part being an extension of our semantics, and a credulous part resulted from its credulousness towards the acceptance of attacks. We then introduce a stratified form of extended argumentation which still allows an unbounded number of levels of attacks against attacks while assuring that all proposed semantics coincide. In this paper we also develop a sound and complete dialectical proof procedure for the presented semantics following a model of dispute that alternates between argumentation to accept arguments and to accept attacks. Baroni at al for short.
منابع مشابه
A dialectic procedure for sceptical, assumption-based argumentation
We present a procedure for computing the sceptical “ideal semantics” for argumentation in assumption-based frameworks. This semantics was first proposed for logic programming in [1], extending the well-founded semantics. The proof procedure is defined by means of a form of dispute derivations, obtained by modifying the dispute derivations given in [2] for computing credulous admissible argument...
متن کاملArgumentation-Based Proof Procedures for Credulous and Sceptical Non-monotonic Reasoning
We define abstract proof procedures for performing credulous and sceptical non-monotonic reasoning, with respect to the argumentation-theoretic formulation of non-monotonic reasoning proposed in [1]. Appropriate instances of the proposed proof procedures provide concrete proof procedures for concrete formalisms for non-monotonic reasoning, for example logic programming with negation as failure ...
متن کاملThe computational complexity of ideal semantics
We analyse the computational complexity of the recently proposed ideal semantics within both abstract argumentation frameworks (AFs) and assumption-based argumentation frameworks (ABFs). It is shown that while typically less tractable than credulous admissibility semantics, the natural decision problems arising with this extension-based model can, perhaps surprisingly, be decided more efficient...
متن کاملThe Computational Complexity of Ideal Semantics I: Abstract Argumentation Frameworks
We analyse the computational complexity of the recently proposed ideal semantics within abstract argumentation frameworks. It is shown that while typically less tractable than credulous admissibility semantics, the natural decision problems arising with this extension-based model can, perhaps surprisingly, be decided more efficiently than sceptical admissibility semantics. In particular the tas...
متن کاملCombining sceptical epistemic reasoning with credulous practical reasoning ( corrected version ) 1
This paper proposes an argument-based semantics for combined epistemic and practical reasoning, taking seriously the idea that in certain contexts epistemic reasoning is sceptical while practical reasoning is credulous. The new semantics combines grounded and preferred semantics. A dialectical proof theory is defined which is sound and complete with respect to this semantics and which combines ...
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:
- J. Log. Comput.
دوره 21 شماره
صفحات -
تاریخ انتشار 2011