Abstract
We present an extension-based approach for computing preferences in an abstract argumentation system. Although numerous argumentation semantics have been developed previously for identifying acceptable sets of arguments from an argumentation framework, there is a lack of justification behind their acceptability based on implicit argument preferences. This paper presents a novel algorithm for exhaustively computing and enumerating all possible sets of preferences for a conflict-free set of arguments in an abstract argumentation framework. We prove the soundness and completeness of the algorithm. The research establishes that preferences are determined using an extension-based approach after the evaluation phase (acceptability of arguments) rather than stated beforehand. We also present some novel insights by comparing the computed preferences for the extensions.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Notes
- 1.
This means it could be either \(C>B\) or \(C=B\).
- 2.
This means it could be either \(A>B\) or \(A=B\), and similarly \(D>E\) or \(D=E\).
References
Amgoud, L., Cayrol, C.: On the acceptability of arguments in preference-based argumentation. In: Proceedings of the Fourteenth Conference on Uncertainty in Artificial Intelligence, UAI 1998, pp. 1–7. Morgan Kaufmann Publishers Inc., San Francisco (1998)
Amgoud, L., Cayrol, C., Berre, D.L.: Comparing arguments using preference orderings for argument-based reasoning. In: Proceedings Eighth IEEE International Conference on Tools with Artificial Intelligence, pp. 400–403 (1996)
Amgoud, L., Vesic, S.: A new approach for preference-based argumentation frameworks. Ann. Math. Artif. Intell. 63(2), 149–183 (2011)
Amgoud, L., Cayrol, C.: Integrating preference orderings into argument-based reasoning. In: Gabbay, D.M., Kruse, R., Nonnengart, A., Ohlbach, H.J. (eds.) ECSQARU/FAPR -1997. LNCS, vol. 1244, pp. 159–170. Springer, Heidelberg (1997). https://doi.org/10.1007/BFb0035620
Amgoud, L., Cayrol, C.: A reasoning model based on the production of acceptable arguments. Ann. Math. Artif. Intell. 34(1), 197–215 (2002)
Amgoud, L., Prade, H.: Using arguments for making and explaining decisions. Artif. Intell. 173(3), 413–436 (2009)
Amgoud, L., Vesic, S.: Generalizing stable semantics by preferences. In: Proceedings of the 2010 Conference on Computational Models of Argument: Proceedings of COMMA 2010, pp. 39–50. IOS Press (2010)
Amgoud, L., Vesic, S.: Rich preference-based argumentation frameworks. Int. J. Approx. Reason. 55(2), 585–606 (2014)
Bench-Capon, T.J.M.: Persuasion in practical argument using value-based argumentation frameworks. J. Log. Comput. 13(3), 429–448 (2003)
Benferhat, S., Dubois, D., Prade, H.: Argumentative inference in uncertain and inconsistent knowledge bases. In: Heckerman, D., Mamdani, A. (eds.) Uncertainty in Artificial Intelligence, pp. 411–419. Morgan Kaufmann (1993)
Besnard, P., Hunter, A.: A logic-based theory of deductive arguments. Artif. Intell. 128(1), 203–235 (2001)
Bonet, B., Geffner, H.: Arguing for decisions: a qualitative model of decision making. In: Proceedings of the Twelfth International Conference on Uncertainty in Artificial Intelligence, UAI 1996, pp. 98–105. Morgan Kaufmann Publishers Inc. (1996)
Caminada, M., Amgoud, L.: On the evaluation of argumentation formalisms. Artif. Intell. 171(5), 286–310 (2007)
Cayrol, C., Royer, V., Saurel, C.: Management of preferences in assumption-based reasoning. In: Bouchon-Meunier, B., Valverde, L., Yager, R.R. (eds.) IPMU 1992. LNCS, vol. 682, pp. 13–22. Springer, Heidelberg (1993). https://doi.org/10.1007/3-540-56735-6_39
Dung, P.M.: On the acceptability of arguments and its fundamental role in nonmonotonic reasoning, logic programming and n-person games. Artif. Intell. 77, 321–357 (1995)
GarcÃa, A.J., Simari, G.R.: Defeasible logic programming: an argumentative approach. Theory Pract. Log. Program. 4(2), 95–138 (2004)
Kaci, S., van der Torre, L.: Preference-based argumentation: arguments supporting multiple values. Int. J. Approx. Reason. 48(3), 730–751 (2008)
Konczak, K.: Voting procedures with incomplete preferences. In: Proceedings of IJCAI 2005 Multidisciplinary Workshop on Advances in Preference Handling (2005)
Modgil, S.: Reasoning about preferences in argumentation frameworks. Artif. Intell. 173(9), 901–934 (2009)
Muller, J., Hunter, A.: An argumentation-based approach for decision making. In: Proceedings of the 2012 IEEE 24th International Conference on Tools with Artificial Intelligence, ICTAI 2012, vol. 01, pp. 564–571. IEEE Computer Society (2012)
Pigozzi, G., Tsoukià s, A., Viappiani, P.: Preferences in artificial intelligence. Ann. Math. Artif. Intell. 77(3), 361–401 (2016)
Pini, M., Rossi, F., Venable, K., Walsh, T.: Incompleteness and incomparability in preference aggregation: complexity results. Artif. Intell. 175(7), 1272–1289 (2011)
Prakken, H., Sartor, G.: Argument-based extended logic programming with defeasible priorities. J. Appl. Non-Class. Log. 7, 25–75 (1997)
Ricci, F., Rokach, L., Shapira, B., Kantor, P.B.: Recommender Systems Handbook, 1st edn. Springer, Heidelberg (2010). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-0-387-85820-3
Simari, G.R., Loui, R.P.: A mathematical treatment of defeasible reasoning and its implementation. Artif. Intell. 53(2), 125–157 (1992)
Sprague, Jr., R.H., Watson, H.J. (eds.): Decision Support Systems, 3rd edn. Putting Theory into Practice. Prentice-Hall Inc., Upper Saddle River (1993)
Walsh, T.: Representing and reasoning with preferences. AI Mag. 28(4), 59–70 (2007)
Acknowledgments
Financial support from The UK Engineering and Physical Sciences Research Council (EPSRC) for the grant (EP/P011829/1), Supporting Security Policy with Effective Digital Intervention (SSPEDI) is gratefully acknowledged.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Appendix
Appendix
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2018 Springer Nature Switzerland AG
About this paper
Cite this paper
Mahesar, Qa., Oren, N., Vasconcelos, W.W. (2018). Computing Preferences in Abstract Argumentation. In: Miller, T., Oren, N., Sakurai, Y., Noda, I., Savarimuthu, B.T.R., Cao Son, T. (eds) PRIMA 2018: Principles and Practice of Multi-Agent Systems. PRIMA 2018. Lecture Notes in Computer Science(), vol 11224. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-03098-8_24
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-03098-8_24
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-030-03097-1
Online ISBN: 978-3-030-03098-8
eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)