A Generalization of Dung's Abstract Framework for Argumentation: Arguing with Sets of Attacking Arguments
نویسندگان
چکیده
One of the most widely studied systems of argumentation is the one described by Dung in a paper from 1995. Unfortunately, this framework does not allow for joint attacks on arguments, which we argue must be required of any truly abstract argumentation framework. A few frameworks can be said to allow for such interactions among arguments, but for various reasons we believe that these are inadequate for modelling argumentation systems with joint attacks. In this paper we propose a generalization of the framework of Dung, which allows for sets of arguments to attack other arguments. We extend the semantics associated with the original framework to this generalization, and prove that all results in the paper by Dung have an equivalent in this more abstract framework.
منابع مشابه
Arguing with Sets of Attacking Arguments
One of the most widely studied systems of argumentation is the one described by Dung in a paper from 1995. Unfortunately, this framework does not allow for joint attacks on arguments, which we argue must be required of any truly abstract argumentation framework. A few frameworks can be said to allow for such interactions among arguments, but for various reasons we believe that these are inadequ...
متن کامل"Minimal defence": a refinement of the preferred semantics for argumentation frameworks
Dung's abstract framework for argumenta-tion enables a study of the interactions between arguments based solely on an " attack " binary relation on the set of arguments. Various ways to solve conflicts between contradictory pieces of information have been proposed in the context of argumentation, non-monotonic reasoning or logic programming, and can be captured by appropriate semantics within D...
متن کاملAbstract Argumentation and Explanation
Argumentation and Explanation Christian Strasser and Dunja Šešelja {christian.strasser, dunja.seselja}@UGent.be Centre for Logic and Philosophy of Science, Ghent University Abstract. In this paper Dung’s abstract argumentation framework (cp. [6]) is extended with explanatory capabilities. Further, we investigate bipolar argumentation systems (cp. [4]), incorporate values (cp. [3]) and generaliz...
متن کاملAn abstract framework for argumentation with structured arguments
An abstract framework for structured arguments is presented that instantiates Dung’s (1995) abstract argumentation frameworks. Arguments are defined as inference trees formed by applying two kinds of inference rules: strict and defeasible rules. This naturally leads to three ways of attacking an argument: attacking a premise, attacking a conclusion and attacking an inference. To resolve such at...
متن کاملSemantics of Abstract Argument Systems
An abstract argument system or argumentation framework, as introduced in a seminal paper by Dung [13], is simply a pair 〈A,R〉 consisting of a set A whose elements are called arguments and of a binary relation R on A called attack relation. The set A may be finite or infinite in general, however, given the introductory purpose of this chapter, we will restrict the presentation to the case of fin...
متن کامل