Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

ASPARTIX: Implementing Argumentation Frameworks Using Answer-Set Programming

  • Conference paper
Logic Programming (ICLP 2008)

Part of the book series: Lecture Notes in Computer Science ((LNPSE,volume 5366))

Included in the following conference series:

Abstract

The system ASPARTIX is a tool for computing acceptable extensions for a broad range of formalizations of Dung’s argumentation framework and generalizations thereof. ASPARTIX relies on a fixed disjunctive datalog program which takes an instance of an argumentation framework as input, and uses the answer-set solver DLV for computing the type of extension specified by the user.

This work was partially supported by the Austrian Science Fund (FWF) under project P20704.

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 84.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 109.99
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

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Bench-Capon, T.J.M., Dunne, P.E.: Argumentation in artificial intelligence. Artif. Intell. 171, 619–641 (2007)

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  2. Dung, P.M.: On the acceptability of arguments and its fundamental role in nonmonotonic reasoning, logic programming and n-person games. Artif. Intell. 77, 321–358 (1995)

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  3. Amgoud, L., Cayrol, C.: A reasoning model based on the production of acceptable arguments. Ann. Math. Artif. Intell. 34, 197–215 (2002)

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  4. Bench-Capon, T.J.M.: Persuasion in practical argument using value-based argumentation frameworks. J. Log. Comput. 13, 429–448 (2003)

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  5. Amgoud, L., Cayrol, C., Lagasquie, M.C., Livet, P.: On bipolarity in argumentation frameworks. International Journal of Intelligent Systems 23, 1–32 (2008)

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  6. South, M., Vreeswijk, G., Fox, J.: Dungine: A java dung reasoner. In: Proceedings of COMMA 2008, pp. 360–368 (2008)

    Google Scholar 

  7. Visser, W.: (2008), http://www.wietskevisser.nl/research/epr/

  8. Cartwright, D., Atkinson, K.: Political engagement through tools for argumentation. In: Proceedings of COMMA 2008, pp. 116–127 (2008)

    Google Scholar 

  9. Gaertner, D., Toni, F.: (2008), http://www.doc.ic.ac.uk/~dg00/casapi.html

  10. Nieves, J.C., Osorio, M., Cortés, U.: Preferred extensions as stable models. Theory and Practice of Logic Programming 8, 527–543 (2008)

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  11. Leone, N., Pfeifer, G., Faber, W., Eiter, T., Gottlob, G., Perri, S., Scarcello, F.: The dlv system for knowledge representation and reasoning. ACM ToCL 7, 499–562 (2006)

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  12. Niemelä, I.: Logic programming with stable model semantics as a constraint programming paradigm. Ann. Math. Artif. Intell. 25, 241–273 (1999)

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  13. Gelfond, M., Lifschitz, V.: Classical negation in logic programs and disjunctive databases. New Generation Comput 9, 365–386 (1991)

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  14. Gebser, M., Liu, L., Namasivayam, G., Neumann, A., Schaub, T., Truszczyński, M.: The first answer set programming system competition. In: Baral, C., Brewka, G., Schlipf, J. (eds.) LPNMR 2007. LNCS, vol. 4483, pp. 3–17. Springer, Heidelberg (2007)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  15. Egly, U., Gaggl, S.A., Woltran, S.: Answer-set programming encodings for argumentation frameworks. Technical Report DBAI-TR-2008-62, Technische Universität Wien (2008)

    Google Scholar 

  16. Wyner, A., Bench-Capon, T.J.M., Atkinson, K.: Arguments, values and baseballs: Representation of Popov v. Hayashi. In: Proceedings of JURIX 2007, pp. 151–160 (2007)

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Institut für Informationssysteme, Technische Universität Wien, Favoritenstraße 9–11, A–1040, Vienna, Austria

    Uwe Egly, Sarah Alice Gaggl & Stefan Woltran

Authors
  1. Uwe Egly
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Sarah Alice Gaggl
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Stefan Woltran
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Clayton School of Information Technology, Monash University, Australia

    Maria Garcia de la Banda

  2. Department of Computer Science, New Mexico State University, NM 88003, Las Cruces, USA

    Enrico Pontelli

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2008 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg

About this paper

Cite this paper

Egly, U., Gaggl, S.A., Woltran, S. (2008). ASPARTIX: Implementing Argumentation Frameworks Using Answer-Set Programming. In: Garcia de la Banda, M., Pontelli, E. (eds) Logic Programming. ICLP 2008. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol 5366. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-89982-2_67

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-89982-2_67

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-540-89981-5

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-540-89982-2

  • eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation