Testing Credulous and Sceptical Acceptance in Small-World Networks
نویسندگان
چکیده
In this paper we test how efficiently state-of-the art solvers are capable of solving credulous and sceptical argument-acceptance for lower-order extensions. As our benchmark we consider two different random graph-models to obtain random Abstract Argumentation Frameworks with small-world characteristics: Kleinberg and Watt-Strogatz. We test two reasoners, i.e., ConArg2 and dynPARTIX, on such benchmark, by comparing their performance on NP/co-NP-complete decision problems related to argument acceptance in admissible, complete, and stable semantics.
منابع مشابه
Inductive Defense for Sceptical Semantics of Extended Argumentation
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 att...
متن کاملCredulous vs. Sceptical Semantics for Ordered Logic Programs
We present a semantic approach to the characterization of credulous and sceptical reasoning mechanisms, within the framework of ordered logic. One of the advantages of our approach is that it integrates thightly with "conservative" ordered logic semantics which is known to generalize "classical" (stable and wellfounded) logic programming semantics. This allows us to compare the conservative and...
متن کاملCombining sceptical epistemic reasoning with credulous practical reasoning
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 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 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 کامل