Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

A Two-Phase Dialogue Game for Skeptical Preferred Semantics

  • Conference paper
  • First Online:
Logics in Artificial Intelligence (JELIA 2016)

Part of the book series: Lecture Notes in Computer Science ((LNAI,volume 10021))

Included in the following conference series:

Abstract

In this paper we propose a labelling based dialogue game for determining whether a single argument within a Dung argumentation framework is skeptically preferred. Our game consists of two phases, and determines the membership of a single argument within the extension, assuming optimal play by dialogue participants. In the first phase, one player attempts to advance arguments to construct an extension not containing the argument under consideration, while the second phase verifies that the extension is indeed a preferred one. Correctness within this basic game requires perfect play by both players, and we therefore also introduce an overarching game to overcome this limitation.

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 39.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 54.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight 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

Notes

  1. 1.

    i.e., only those arguments for which there is a directed path according to the defeat relation to the focal argument in the graph generated by the argumentation framework.

References

  1. Caminada, M.: Dialogues and HY-arguments. In: Delgrande, J., Schaub, T. (eds.) 10th International Workshop on Non-Monotonic Reasoning, pp. 94–99 (2004)

    Google Scholar 

  2. Caminada, M.: On the issue of reinstatement in argumentation. In: Fisher, M., Hoek, W., Konev, B., Lisitsa, A. (eds.) JELIA 2006. LNCS (LNAI), vol. 4160, pp. 111–123. Springer, Heidelberg (2006). doi:10.1007/11853886_11

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  3. Caminada, M.W.A., Dvořák, W., Vesic, S.: Preferred semantics as socratic discussion. J. Log. Comput. 26(4), 1257–1292 (2016). doi:10.1093/logcom/exu005

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Caminada, M., Kutlak, R., Oren, N., Vasconcelos, W.W.: Scrutable plan enactment via argumentation and natural language generation. In: Bazzan, A.L.C., Huhns, M.N., Lomuscio, A., Scerri, P. (eds.) International conference on Autonomous Agents and Multi-Agent Systems, pp. 1625–1626 (2014)

    Google Scholar 

  5. Caminada, M., Podlaszewski, M.: Grounded semantics as persuasion dialogue. In: Verheij, B., Szeider, S., Woltran, S. (eds.) Computational Models of Argument, vol. 245, pp. 478–485 (2012)

    Google Scholar 

  6. Caminada, M., Podlaszewski, M.: User-computer persuasion dialogue for grounded semantics. In: Benelux Conference on Artificial Intelligence, pp. 343–344 (2012)

    Google Scholar 

  7. Cayrol, C., Doutre, S., Mengin, J.: Dialectical proof theories for the credulous preferred semantics of argumentation frameworks. In: Benferhat, S., Besnard, P. (eds.) Symbolic, Quantitative Approaches to Reasoning with Uncertainty, vol. 2143, pp. 668–679 (2001)

    Google Scholar 

  8. Doutre, S., Mengin, J.: On sceptical vs credulous acceptance for abstract argument systems. In: Delgrande, J., Schaub, T. (eds.) 10th International Workshop on Non-Monotonic Reasoning, pp. 134–139 (2004)

    Google Scholar 

  9. 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), 321–358 (1995)

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  10. Dung, P.M., Thang, P.M.: A sound and complete dialectical proof procedure for sceptical preferred argumentation. In: LPNMR-Workshop on Argumentation and Nonmonotonic Reasoning, pp. 49–63 (2007)

    Google Scholar 

  11. Jakobovits, H., Vermeir, D.: Dialectic semantics for argumentation frameworks. In: Seventh International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Law, pp. 53–62 (1999)

    Google Scholar 

  12. Modgil, S., Caminada, M.: Proof theories and algorithms for abstract argumentation frameworks. In: Simari, G., Rahwan, I. (eds.) Argumentation in Artificial Intelligence, pp. 105–129. Springer, US (2009)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  13. Prakken, H.: Combining sceptical epistemic reasoning with credulous practical reasoning. In: Dunne, P.E., Bench-Capon, T.J.M. (eds.) Computational Models of Argument, vol. 144, pp. 311–322 (2006)

    Google Scholar 

  14. Shams, Z., Oren, N.: A labelling based dialogue game for skeptical preferred semantics, Technical report ABDN-CS-2016-02. http://homepages.abdn.ac.uk/n.oren/pages/abdn-CS2016-02.pdf

  15. Verheij, B.: Two approaches to dialectical argumentation: admissible sets and argumentation stages. In: International Conference on Formal and Applied Practical Reasoning, pp. 357–368 (1996)

    Google Scholar 

  16. Vreeswik, G.A.W., Prakken, H.: Credulous and sceptical argument games for preferred semantics. In: Ojeda-Aciego, M., Guzmán, I.P., Brewka, G., Pereira, L. (eds.) JELIA 2000. LNCS (LNAI), vol. 1919, pp. 239–253. Springer, Heidelberg (2000). doi:10.1007/3-540-40006-0_17

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Computer Science, University of Bath, Bath, UK

    Zohreh Shams

  2. Department of Computing Science, University of Aberdeen, Aberdeen, UK

    Nir Oren

Authors
  1. Zohreh Shams
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Nir Oren
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Nir Oren .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Open University of Cyprus, Nicosia, Cyprus

    Loizos Michael

  2. University of Cyprus, Nicosia, Cyprus

    Antonis Kakas

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2016 Springer International Publishing AG

About this paper

Cite this paper

Shams, Z., Oren, N. (2016). A Two-Phase Dialogue Game for Skeptical Preferred Semantics. In: Michael, L., Kakas, A. (eds) Logics in Artificial Intelligence. JELIA 2016. Lecture Notes in Computer Science(), vol 10021. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-48758-8_41

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-48758-8_41

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-319-48757-1

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-319-48758-8

  • eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation