Skip to main content

Conflict-Tolerant Semantics for Argumentation Frameworks

  • Conference paper

Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNAI,volume 7519)

Abstract

We introduce new kinds of semantics for abstract argumentation frameworks, in which, while all the accepted arguments are justified (in the sense that each one of them must be defended), they may still attack each other. The rationality behind such semantics is that in reality there are situations in which contradictory arguments coexist in the same theory, yet the collective set of accepted arguments is not trivialized, in the sense that other arguments may still be rejected.

To provide conflict-tolerant semantics for argumentation frameworks we extend the two standard approaches for defining coherent (conflict-free) semantics for argumentation frameworks: the extension-based approach and the labeling-based approach. We show that the one-to-one relationship between extensions and labelings of conflict-free semantics is carried on to a similar correspondence between the extended approaches for providing conflict-tolerant semantics. Thus, in our setting as well, these are essentially two points of views for the same thing.

Keywords

  • None None
  • Argumentation Theory
  • Argumentation Framework
  • Complete Extension
  • Stable Extension

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.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution.

Buying options

Chapter
USD   29.95
Price excludes VAT (Canada)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD   39.99
Price excludes VAT (Canada)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD   54.99
Price excludes VAT (Canada)
  • 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

Learn about institutional subscriptions

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Arieli, O., Caminada, M.W.A.: A general QBF-based framework for formalizing argumentation. In: Proc. COMMA 2012. IOS Press (in press, 2012)

    Google Scholar 

  2. Baroni, P., Caminada, M., Giacomin, M.: An introduction to argumentation semantics. The Knowledge Engineering Review 26(4), 365–410 (2011)

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  3. Baroni, P., Giacomin, M.: Semantics for abstract argumentation systems. In: Rahwan and Simary [13], pp. 25–44

    Google Scholar 

  4. Belnap, N.D.: A useful four-valued logic. In: Dunn, J.M., Epstein, G. (eds.) Modern Uses of Multiple-Valued Logics, pp. 7–37. Reidel Publishing (1977)

    Google Scholar 

  5. 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)

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  6. Caminada, M., Carnielli, W.A., Dunne, P.: Semi-stable semantics. Journal of Logic and Computation (in print, 2012)

    Google Scholar 

  7. Caminada, M., Gabbay, D.M.: A logical account of formal argumentation. Studia Logica. 93(2-3), 109–145 (2009)

    CrossRef  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

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

    CrossRef  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  9. Dung, P.M., Mancarella, P., Toni, F.: Computing ideal sceptical argumentation. Artificial Intelligence 171(10-15), 642–674 (2007)

    CrossRef  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  10. Dvořák, W.: On the Complexity of Computing the Justification Status of an Argument. In: Modgil, S., Oren, N., Toni, F. (eds.) TAFA 2011. LNCS (LNAI), vol. 7132, pp. 32–49. Springer, Heidelberg (2012)

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  11. Egly, U., Gaggl, S.A., Woltran, S.: Answer-set programming encodings for argumentation frameworks. Argument and Computation 1(2), 144–177 (2010)

    CrossRef  MATH  Google Scholar 

  12. Rahwan, I., Simari, G.R.: Argumentation in Artificial Intelligence. Springer (2009)

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

Copyright information

© 2012 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg

About this paper

Cite this paper

Arieli, O. (2012). Conflict-Tolerant Semantics for Argumentation Frameworks. In: del Cerro, L.F., Herzig, A., Mengin, J. (eds) Logics in Artificial Intelligence. JELIA 2012. Lecture Notes in Computer Science(), vol 7519. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-33353-8_3

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-33353-8_3

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-642-33352-1

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-642-33353-8

  • eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)