Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Argument-based Logic Programming

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Argumentation in Artificial Intelligence

In this chapter we describe several formalisms for integrating Logic ProgrammingandArgumentation. Research on the relation between logic programming and argumentation has been and still is fruitful in both directions: Some argumentation formalisms were used to define semantics for logic programming and also logic programming was used for providing an underlying representational language for non-abstract argumentation formalisms.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 129.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 169.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 169.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. T. Alsinet, C. Chesñevar, L. Godo, S. Sandri, and G. Simari. Formalizing argumentative reasoning in a possibilistic logic programming setting with fuzzy unification. International Journal of Approximate Reasoning, 48(3):711–729, 2008.

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  2. T. Alsinet, C. Chesñevar, L. Godo, and G. Simari. A logic programming framework for possibilistic argumentation: Formalization and logical properties. Fuzzy Sets and Systems, 159(10):208–1228, 2008.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. G. Antoniou, D. Billington, G. Governatori, M. J. Maher, and A. Rock. A family of defeasible reasoning logics and its implementation. In Proceedings of European Conference on Artificial Intelligence (ECAI), pages 459–463, 2000.

    Google Scholar 

  4. G. Antoniou, D. Billington, and M. J. Maher. Normal forms for defeasible logic. In Proceedings of International Joint Conference and Symposium on Logic Programming, pages 160–174. MIT Press, 1998.

    Google Scholar 

  5. D. Bryant and P. J. Krause. A review of current defeasible reasoning implementations. The Knowledge Engineering Review, 23:1–34, 2008.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. D. Bryant, P. J. Krause, and G. Vreeswijk. Argue tuProlog: A Lightweight Argumentation Engine for Agent Applications. In Proc. of 1st Int. Conference on Computational Models of Argument (COMMA06), pages 27–32. IOS Press, 2006.

    Google Scholar 

  7. M. Caminada and L. Amgoud. On the evaluation of argumentation formalisms. Artificial Intelligence, 171(5-6):286–310, 2007.

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  8. C. Chesñevar and G. Simari. Modelling inference in argumentation through labelled deduction: Formalization and logical properties. Logica Universalis, 1(1):93–124, 2007.

    Article  MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  9. J. Dix, C. Chesñevar, F. Stolzenburg, and G. Simari. Relating Defeasible and Normal Logic Programming through Transformation Properties. Theoretical Computer Science, 290(1):499–529, 2002.

    Google Scholar 

  10. P. M. Dung. On the acceptability of arguments and its fundamental role in nonmonotonic reasoning and logic programming and n-person games. Artificial Intelligence, 77:321–357, 1995.

    Article  MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  11. E. Ferretti, M. Errecalde, A. García, and G. Simari. Decision rules and arguments in defeasible decision making. In P. Besnard, S. Doutre, and A. Hunter, editors, Proc. 2nd Int. Conference on Computational Models of Arguments (COMMA), volume 172 of Frontiers in Artificial Intelligence and Applications, pages 171–182. IOS Press,2008.

    Google Scholar 

  12. D. Gabbay. Theoretical foundations for non-monotonic reasoning in expert systems. In K. Apt, editor, Logics and Models of Concurrent Systems, pages 439–459. Springer-Verlag, 1985.

    Google Scholar 

  13. A. García, N. Rotstein, M. Tucat, and G. Simari. An argumentative reasoning service for deliberative agents. In Z. Zhang and J. Siekmann, editors, LNAI 4798 Proceedings of the 2nd. International Conference on Knowledge Science, Engineering and Management (KSEM 2007), pages ,128–139. Springer-Verlag, 2007.

    Google Scholar 

  14. A. J. García, N. D. Rotstein, and G. R. Simari. Dialectical explanations in defeasible argumentation. In K. Mellouli, editor, ECSQARU, volume 4724 of Lecture Notes in Computer Science, pages 295–307. Springer, 2007.

    Google Scholar 

  15. A. J. García and G. R. Simari. Defeasible logic programming: An argumentative approach. TPLP, 4(1-2):95–138, 2004.

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  16. S. Kraus, D. Lehmann, and M. Magidor. Nonmonotonic reasoning, preferential models and cumulative logics. Artificial Intelligence, 44:167–207, 1990.

    Article  MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  17. V. Lifschitz. Foundations of logic programs. In G. Brewka, editor, Principles of Knowledge Representation, pages 69–128. CSLI Pub., 1996.

    Google Scholar 

  18. D. Makinson. General patterns in nonmonotonic reasoning. In D. Gabbay, editor, Handbook of Logic in Artificial Intelligence and Logic Programming (vol 3): Nonmonotonic and Uncertain Reasoning, pages 35–110. Oxford University Press, 1994.

    Google Scholar 

  19. D. Nute. Defeasible reasoning. In Proc. of the 20th annual Hawaii Int. Conf. on System Sciences, 1987.

    Google Scholar 

  20. D. Nute. Defeasible logic. In D. Gabbay, C. Hogger, and J.A.Robinson, editors, Handbook of Logic in Artificial Intelligence and Logic Programming, Vol 3, pages 355–395. Oxford University Press, 1994.

    Google Scholar 

  21. J. Pollock. Cognitive Carpentry: A Blueprint for How to Build a Person. MIT Press, 1995.

    Google Scholar 

  22. H. Prakken. Logical Tools for Modelling Legal Argument. A Study of Defeasible Reasoning in Law. Kluwer Law and Philosophy Library, 1997.

    Google Scholar 

  23. H. Prakken and G. Sartor. A dialectical model of assessing conflicting arguments in legal reasoning. Artificial Intelligence and Law, 4 (331-368), 1996.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. H. Prakken and G. Sartor. Argument-based logic programming with defeasible priorities. J. of Applied Non-classical Logics, 7 (25-75), 1997.

    MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  25. H. Prakken and G. Vreeswijk. Logical systems for defeasible argumentation. In D.Gabbay, editor, Handbook of Philosophical Logic, 2nd ed. Kluwer, 2000.

    Google Scholar 

  26. R. Schweimeier and M. Schroeder. A parameterised hierarchy of argumentation semantics for extended logic programming and its application to the well-founded semantics. TPLP, 5(1-2):207–242, 2005.

    MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  27. G. R. Simari, C. I. Chesñevar, and A. J. García. The role of dialectics in defeasible argumentation. In Proc. of the XIV Int. Conf. of the Chilenean Computer Science Society, pages 335–344, 1994.

    Google Scholar 

  28. G. R. Simari and R. P. Loui. A Mathematical Treatment of Defeasible Reasoning and its Implementation. Artificial Intelligence, 53:125–157, 1992.

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  29. F. Stolzenburg, A. J. García, C. I. Chesñevar, and G. R. Simari. Computing generalized specificity. Journal of Applied Non-Classical Logics, 13(1):87–113, 2003.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

This research was funded by CONICET Argentina Project PIP 5050, and SGCyT, Universidad Nacional del Sur, Argentina.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Computer Science and Engineering, Universidad Nacional del Sur, Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas (CONICET), Bahia Blanca, Argentina

    Alejandro J. García

  2. Department of Informatics Clausthal University of Technology, Clausthal-Zellerfeld, Lower Saxony, Germany

    Jürgen Dix

  3. Department of Computer Science and Engineering, Universidad Nacional del Sur Bahia Blanca, Bahia Blanca, Argentina

    Guillermo R. Simari

Authors
  1. Alejandro J. García
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Jürgen Dix
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Guillermo R. Simari
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Alejandro J. García .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

    Rights and permissions

    Reprints and permissions

    Copyright information

    © 2009 Springer-Verlag US

    About this chapter

    Cite this chapter

    García, A.J., Dix, J., Simari, G.R. (2009). Argument-based Logic Programming. In: Simari, G., Rahwan, I. (eds) Argumentation in Artificial Intelligence. Springer, Boston, MA. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-0-387-98197-0_8

    Download citation

    • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-0-387-98197-0_8

    • Published:

    • Publisher Name: Springer, Boston, MA

    • Print ISBN: 978-0-387-98196-3

    • Online ISBN: 978-0-387-98197-0

    • eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)

    Publish with us

    Policies and ethics

    Search

    Navigation