Understanding the Abstract Dialectical Framework (Preliminary Report)

نویسنده

  • Sylwia Polberg
چکیده

Among the most general structures extending the framework by Dung are the abstract dialectical frameworks (ADFs). They come equipped with various types of semantics, with the most prominent – the labeling–based one – analyzed in the context of computational complexity, signatures, instantiations and software support. This makes the abstract dialectical frameworks valuable tools for argumentation. However, there are fewer results available concerning the relation between the ADFs and other argumentation frameworks. In this paper we would like to address this issue by introducing a number of translations from various formalisms into ADFs. The results of our study show the similarities and differences between them, thus promoting the use and understanding of ADFs. Moreover, our analysis also proves their capability to model many of the existing frameworks, including those that go beyond the attack relation. Finally, translations allow other structures to benefit from the research on ADFs in general and from the existing software in particular.

برای دانلود رایگان متن کامل این مقاله و بیش از 32 میلیون مقاله دیگر ابتدا ثبت نام کنید

ثبت نام

اگر عضو سایت هستید لطفا وارد حساب کاربری خود شوید

منابع مشابه

The DIAMOND System for Argumentation: Preliminary Report

Abstract dialectical frameworks (ADFs) are a powerful generalisation of Dung’s abstract argumentation frameworks. In this paper we present an answer set programming based software system, called DIAMOND (DIAlectical MOdels eNcoDing). It translates ADFs into answer set programs whose stable models correspond to models of the ADF with respect to several semantics (i.e. admissible, complete, stabl...

متن کامل

Revision of Abstract Dialectical Frameworks : Preliminary Report ∗

Abstract Dialectical Frameworks (ADFs) enhance the capability of Dung’s argumentation frameworks by modelling relations between arguments in a flexible way, thus constituting a very general formalism for abstract argumentation. Since argumentation is an inherently dynamic process, understanding how change in ADFs can be formalized is important. In this work we study AGM-style revision operators...

متن کامل

Splitting Abstract Dialectical Frameworks

Among the abundance of generalizations of abstract argumentation frameworks, the formalism of abstract dialectical frameworks (ADFs) proved to be powerful in modelling various argumentation problems. Implementations of reasoning tasks that come within ADFs struggle with their high computational complexity. Thus methods simplifying the evaluation process are required. One such method is splittin...

متن کامل

Dialectical Proof Theory for Defeasible Argumentation with Defeasible Priorities (Preliminary Report)

In this paper a dialectical proof theory is proposed for logical systems for defeasible argumentation that t a certain format. This format is the abstract theory developed by Dung, Kowalski and others. A main feature of the proof theory is that it also applies to systems in which reasoning about the standards for comparing arguments is possible. The proof theory could serve as thèlogical core' ...

متن کامل

A Lattice-Based Approach to Computing Warranted Beliefs in Skeptical Argumentation Frameworks

Abstract argumentation frameworks have played a major role as a way of understanding argumentbased inference, resulting in different argumentbased semantics. In order to make such semantics computationally attractive, suitable proof procedures are required, in which a search space of arguments is examined to find out which arguments are warranted or ultimately acceptable. This paper introduces ...

متن کامل

ذخیره در منابع من


  با ذخیره ی این منبع در منابع من، دسترسی به آن را برای استفاده های بعدی آسان تر کنید

عنوان ژورنال:
  • CoRR

دوره abs/1607.00819  شماره 

صفحات  -

تاریخ انتشار 2016