Theoretical and Computational Properties of Preference-based Argumentation
نویسندگان
چکیده
During the last years, argumentation has been gaining increasing interest in modeling different reasoning tasks of an agent. Many recent works have acknowledged the importance of incorporating preferences or priorities in argumentation. However, relatively little is known about the theoretical and computational implications of preferences in argumentation. In this paper we introduce and study an abstract preference-based argumentation framework that extends Dung’s formalism by imposing a preference relation over the arguments. Under some reasonable assumptions about the preference relation, we show that the new framework enjoys desirable properties, such as coherence. We also present theoretical results that shed some light on the role that preferences play in argumentation. Moreover, we show that although some reasoning problems are intractable in the new framework, it appears that the preference relation has a positive impact on the complexity of reasoning.
منابع مشابه
Proceedings of the Second Summer School on Argumentation: Computational and Linguistic Perspectives (SSA'16)
My thesis focuses on using argumentation to model common-sense reasoning with preferences. I have equipped a structured argumentation formalism, Assumption-Based Argumentation, with a preference handling mechanism. I aim to advance the newly proposed formalism, called ABA+, present its place among other argumentation formalisms and discuss various properties of ABA+.
متن کاملComputational study on geometric and electronic properties of 3.6-carbazole based conjugated polymers
In this work, we present firstly a study based on the calculation of the local spin densities of radical cations, which is known as a good measure of reactivity for coupling reactions, to obtain a theoretical basis for the one-step formation of poly(3.6-carbazole) and derivatives. Then we detail a DFT theoretical study of the geometric and electronic properties of oligomers based on carbazole a...
متن کاملArgumentation with Abduction
This paper presents a general approach to combining argumentation and abduction where the different uses of argumentation for preference reasoning and abduction for reasoning under incomplete information are synthesized together in an enhancing way. This integrated approach of argumentation and abduction can form the basis for encoding adaptable preference policies in the face of incomplete inf...
متن کاملToward a Computational Analysis of Probabilistic Argumentation Frameworks
In this paper we analyze probabilistic argumentation frameworks (PAFs), defined as an extension of Dung abstract argumentation frameworks in which each argument is asserted with a probability . The debate around PAFs has so far centered on their theoretical definition and basic properties. This work contributes to their computational analysis by proposing a first recursive algorithm to compute ...
متن کاملSome Theoretical Results on the Relationship Between Argumentation and Coherence Theory
This work provides initial results on the relationship between argumentation and Paul Thagard’s coherence theory. We study the relationship, via appropriate transformations, between different types of coherent graphs (according to the values in the arcs) and different argumentation frameworks such as Dung’s abstract argumentation framework, weighted argument systems or preference-based argument...
متن کامل