A Formal Concept View of Abstract Argumentation
نویسندگان
چکیده
The paper presents a parallel between two important theories for the treatment of information which address questions that are apparently unrelated and that are studied by different research communities: an enriched view of formal concept analysis and abstract argumentation. Both theories exploit a binary relation (expressing object-property links, attacks between arguments). We show that when an argumentation framework rather considers the complementary relation does not attack, then its stable extensions can be seen as the exact counterparts of formal concepts. This leads to a cube of oppositions, a generalization of the well-known square of oppositions, between eight remarkable sets of arguments. This provides a richer view for argumentation in cases of bi-valued attack relations and fuzzy ones.
منابع مشابه
Argumentation abstraite et concepts formels A formal concept view of abstract argumentation
This paper for the first time presents a parallel between two important theories for the treatment of information which address questions that are apparently completely different and that are studied by research communities that are fully distinct : the formal concept analysis theory on the one hand and the abstract theory of argumentation on the other hand. These two theories exploit a binary ...
متن کاملAn Algorithm for Stage Semantics
In the current paper, we re-examine the concept of stage semantics, which is one of the oldest semantics for abstract argumentation. Using a formal treatment of its properties, we explain how the intuition behind stage semantics differs from the intuition behind the admissibility based semantics that most scholars in argumentation theory are familiar with. We then provide a labelling-based algo...
متن کاملStratified Labelings for Abstract Argumentation (Preliminary Report)
argumentation frameworks [Dun95] take a very simple view on argumentation as they do not presuppose any internal structure of an argument. Abstract argumentation frameworks only consider the interactions of arguments by means of an attack relation between arguments. Definition 1 (Abstract Argumentation Framework). An abstract argumentation framework AF is a tuple AF = (Arg,→) where Arg is a set...
متن کاملPrioritized Norms in Formal Argumentation
To resolve conflicts among norms, various nonmonotonic formalisms can be used to perform prioritized normative reasoning. Meanwhile, formal argumentation provides a way to represent nonmonotonic logics. In this paper, we propose a representation of prioritized normative reasoning by argumentation. Using hierarchical abstract normative systems, we define three kinds of prioritized normative reas...
متن کامل4 A ug 2 01 3 Stratified Labelings for Abstract Argumentation ( Preliminary Report )
argumentation frameworks [Dun95] take a very simple view on argumentation as they do not presuppose any internal structure of an argument. Abstract argumentation frameworks only consider the interactions of arguments by means of an attack relation between arguments. Definition 1 (Abstract Argumentation Framework). An abstract argumentation framework AF is a tuple AF = (Arg,→) where Arg is a set...
متن کامل