On the Equivalence between Logic Programming Semantics and Argumentation Semantics
In this paper, we re-examine the connection between formal argumentation and logic programming from the perspective of semantics. We note that one particular translation from logic programs to instantiated argumentation (the one described by Wu, Caminada and Gabbay) can serve as a basis for describing various equivalences between logic programming semantics and argumentation semantics. In particular, we are able to provide a formal connection between regular semantics for logic programming and preferred semantics for formal argumentation. We also show that there exist logic programming semantics (L-stable semantics) that cannot be captured by any abstract argumentation semantics.
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
- 2.Wu, Y., Caminada, M., Gabbay, D.: Complete extensions in argumentation coincide with 3-valued stable models in logic programming. Studia Logica 93(1-2), 383–403 (2009); Special issue: new ideas in argumentation theoryGoogle Scholar
- 5.Modgil, S., Prakken, H.: A general account of argumentation with preferences. Artificial Intellligence (in press, 2013)Google Scholar
- 7.Caminada, M., Gabbay, D.: A logical account of formal argumentation. Studia Logica 93(2-3), 109–145 (2009); Special issue: new ideas in argumentation theoryGoogle Scholar
- 11.Wu, Y., Caminada, M.: A labelling-based justification status of arguments. Studies in Logic 3(4), 12–29 (2010)Google Scholar
- 12.Caminada, M., Sá, S., Alcântara, J.: On the equivalence between logic programming semantics and argumentation semantics. Technical Report ABDN–CS–13–01, University of Aberdeen (2013)Google Scholar
- 14.Pollock, J.: Cognitive Carpentry. A Blueprint for How to Build a Person. MIT Press, Cambridge (1995)Google Scholar