On Computing Explanations in Abstract Argumentation
نویسندگان
چکیده
Argumentation can be viewed as a process of generating explanations. We propose a new argumentation semantics, related admissibility, for closely capturing explanations in Abstract Argumentation, and distinguish between compact and verbose explanations. We show that dispute forests, composed of dispute trees, can be used to correctly compute these explanations.
منابع مشابه
On Computing Explanations in Argumentation
Argumentation can be viewed as a process of generating explanations. However, existing argumentation semantics are developed for identifying acceptable arguments within a set, rather than giving concrete justifications for them. In this work, we propose a new argumentation semantics, related admissibility, designed for giving explanations to arguments in both Abstract Argumentation and Assumpti...
متن کاملRelating ways to instantiate abstract argumentation frameworks
This paper studies the relation between various ways to instantiate Dung’s abstract argumentation frameworks. First the ASPIC framework, which explicitly generates abstract argumentation frameworks, is equivalently reformulated in terms of John Pollock’s recursive labelling method, which does not explicitly generate such frameworks. The reformulation arguably facilitates more natural explanatio...
متن کاملCredulous Acceptability in Probabilistic Abstract Argumentation: Complexity Results
Probabilistic abstract argumentation combines Dung’s abstract argumentation framework with probability theory in order to model uncertainty in argumentation. In this setting, we address the fundamental problem of computing the probability that an argument is (credulously) acceptable according to a given semantics. Specifically, we focus on the most popular semantics (i.e., admissible, stable, s...
متن کاملExplanation for Case-Based Reasoning via Abstract Argumentation
Case-based reasoning (CBR) is extensively used in AI in support of several applications, to assess a new situation (or case) by recollecting past situations (or cases) and employing the ones most similar to the new situation to give the assessment. In this paper we study properties of a recently proposed method for CBR, based on instantiated Abstract Argumentation and referred to as AA-CBR, for...
متن کاملOn the Complexity of Probabilistic Abstract Argumentation
Probabilistic abstract argumentation combines Dung’s abstract argumentation framework with probability theory in order to model uncertainty in argumentation. In this setting, we address the fundamental problem of computing the probability that a set of arguments is an extension according to a given semantics. We focus on the most popular semantics (i.e., admissible, stable, complete, grounded, ...
متن کامل