Advertisement

Splitting Argumentation Frameworks: An Empirical Evaluation

  • Ringo Baumann
  • Gerhard Brewka
  • Renata Wong
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 7132)

Abstract

In a recent paper Baumann [1] has shown that splitting results, similar to those known for logic programs under answer set semantics and default logic, can also be obtained for Dung argumentation frameworks (AFs). Under certain conditions a given AF A can be split into subparts A 1 and A 2 such that extensions of A can be computed by (1) computing an extension E 1 of A 1, (2) modifying A 2 based on E 1, and (3) combining E 1 and an extension E 2 of the modified variant of A 2. In this paper we perform a systematic empirical evaluation of the effects of splitting on the computation of extensions. Our study shows that the performance of algorithms may drastically improve when splitting is applied.

Keywords

Empirical Evaluation Average Runtime Argumentation Framework Default Theory Labelling Algorithm 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    Baumann, R.: Splitting an Argumentation Framework. In: Delgrande, J.P., Faber, W. (eds.) LPNMR 2011. LNCS, vol. 6645, pp. 40–53. Springer, Heidelberg (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Caminada, M.: On the Issue of Reinstatement in Argumentation. In: Fisher, M., van der Hoek, W., Konev, B., Lisitsa, A. (eds.) JELIA 2006. LNCS (LNAI), vol. 4160, pp. 111–123. Springer, Heidelberg (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    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)MathSciNetzbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Lifschitz, V., Turner, H.: Splitting a logic program. In: ICLP, pp. 23–37 (1994)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Modgil, S., Caminada, M.: Proof theories and algorithms for abstract argumentation frameworks. In: Rahwan, I., Simari, G.R. (eds.) Argumentation in Artificial Intelligence, pp. 105–132. Springer, Heidelberg (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Prakken, H.: An abstract framework for argumentation with structured arguments. Argument and Computation 1, 93–124 (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Tarjan, R.E.: Depth-first search and linear graph algorithms. SIAM J. Comput. 1(2), 146–160 (1972)MathSciNetzbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Turner, H.: Splitting a default theory. In: Proc. AAAI 1996, pp. 645–651 (1996)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2012

Authors and Affiliations

  • Ringo Baumann
    • 1
  • Gerhard Brewka
    • 1
  • Renata Wong
    • 1
  1. 1.Universität LeipzigLeipzigGermany

Personalised recommendations