Semantics of Extended Argumentation Frameworks Defined by Renovation Sets

  • Hengfei Li
  • Jiachao WuEmail author
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 11873)


Dung’s theory of abstract argumentation frameworks plays an increasingly important role in artificial intelligence. Extended argumentation frameworks extend Dung’s AF by considering attacks on attacks. In this paper we introduce a new EAF semantics that deals with infinite deductive defence. This EAF semantics is underpinned by a new notion called renovation sets. Based on this, the concepts of conflict-freeness and acceptability are re-defined.



This work is supported by the NSFC (11601288) and the Natural Science Foundation of Shandong (ZR2016AQ21). The authors appreciate Professor P. Baroni, Professor C. Cayrol and Professor M. Giacomin for their constructive advice. They thank the anonymous reviewers for their helpful comments.


  1. 1.
    Baroni, P., Caminada, M., Giacomin, M.: An introduction to argumentation semantics. Knowl. Eng. Rev. 26(4), 365–410 (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Baroni, P., Cerutti, F., Giacomin, M., Guida, G.: AFRA: argumentation framework with recursive attacks. Int. J. Approximate Reasoning 52(1), 19–37 (2011)MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Cayrol, C., Cohen, A., Lagasquie-Schiex, M.C.: Towards a new framework for recursive interactions in abstract bipolar argumentation. In: Proceedings of COMMA 2016, pp. 191–198. IOS Press (2016)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Cohen, A., Gottiferedi, S., García, A.J., Simari, G.R.: On the acceptability semantics of argumentation frameworks with recursive attack and support. In: Proceedings of COMMA 2016, pp. 231–242. IOS Press (2016)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Cohen, A., Gottifredi, S., García, A.J., Simari, G.R.: An approach to abstract argumentation with recursive attack and support. J. Appl. Logic 13(4), 509–533 (2015)MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    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)MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Gabbay, D.M.: Semantics for higher level attacks in extended argumentation frames part 1: overview. Stud. Logica. 93(2–3), 357 (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Hanh, D., Dung, P.M., Hung, N.D., Thang, P.M.: Inductive defense for sceptical semantics of extended argumentation. J. Logic Comput. 21(2), 307–349 (2010)MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Modgil, S.: Reasoning about preferences in argumentation frameworks. Artif. Intell. 173(9–10), 901–934 (2009)MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.School of Computer Science and TechnologyShandong Jianzhu UniversityJinanChina
  2. 2.Department of MathematicsShandong Normal UniversityJinanChina

Personalised recommendations