Abstract
We show how defeasible reasoning can be embedded into ABF. Differently from other proposals, we do not encode the conflict resolution mechanism for defeasible rules into the ABF’s deductive systems. Instead, we formalize the notions of conflict and conflict resolution and make them part of the extended ABF framework (XABF). This improves the control over the conflict resolution process, and allows to devise and compare different domain-dependent conflict resolution strategies. We also show, that no matter which conflict resolution strategy is used, our framework is able to guarantee certain desired properties.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution.
Buying options
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Learn about institutional subscriptionsReferences
Baláž, M., Frtús, J., Homola, M.: Conflict resolution in structured argumentation. In: LPAR-19 (Short Papers), EPiC, vol. 26, pp. 23–34. EasyChair (2014)
Baláž, M., Frtús, J., Homola, M., Šefránek, J., Flouris, G.: Embedding defeasible logic programs into generalized logic programs. In: WLP, vol. 1335 of CEUR-WS (2014)
Bondarenko, A., Dung, P.M., Kowalski, R.A., Toni, F.: An abstract, argumentation-theoretic approach to default reasoning. Artif. Intell. 93(1–2), 63–101 (1997)
Caminada, M., Amgoud, L.: On the evaluation of argumentation formalisms. Artif. Intell. 171(5–6), 286–310 (2007)
Dung, P.M.: On the acceptability of arguments and its fundamental role in nonmonotonic reasoning, logic programming and n-person games. Artif. Intell. 77(2), 321–357 (1995)
Dung, P.M., Mancarella, P., Toni, F.: Computing ideal sceptical argumentation. Artif. Intell. 171(10–15), 642–674 (2007)
Kowalski, R.A., Toni, F.: Abstract argumentation. Artif. Intell. Law 4(3–4), 275–296 (1996)
Modgil, S., Prakken, H.: Revisiting preferences and argumentation. In: IJCAI (2011)
Prakken, H.: An abstract framework for argumentation with structured arguments. Argum. Comput. 1(2), 93–124 (2010)
Prakken, H., Sartor, G.: Argument-based extended logic programming with defeasible priorities. J. Appl. Nonclassical Log. 7(1), 25–75 (1997)
Toni, F.: Assumption-based argumentation for closed and consistent defeasible reasoning. In: Satoh, K., Inokuchi, A., Nagao, K., Kawamura, T. (eds.) JSAI 2007. LNCS (LNAI), vol. 4914, pp. 390–402. Springer, Heidelberg (2008)
Vreeswijk, G.A.W.: Abstract argumentation systems. Artif. Intell. 90(1–2), 225–279 (1997)
Acknowledgements
This work resulted from the Slovak–Greek bilateral project co-financed by APVV (as SK-GR-0070-11) and GSRT together with the EU (as 12SLO_ ET29_1087). The Slovak side further acknowledges support from the VEGA project no. 1/1333/12. Martin BalᎠand Martin Homola are also supported by the APVV project no. APVV-0513-10.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2015 Springer International Publishing Switzerland
About this paper
Cite this paper
Baláž, M., Frtús, J., Flouris, G., Homola, M., Šefránek, J. (2015). Conflict Resolution in Assumption-Based Frameworks. In: Bulling, N. (eds) Multi-Agent Systems. EUMAS 2014. Lecture Notes in Computer Science(), vol 8953. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-17130-2_24
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-17130-2_24
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-319-17129-6
Online ISBN: 978-3-319-17130-2
eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)