Abstract
Splitting results in non-mononotonic formalisms have a long tradition. On the one hand, these results can be used to improve existing computational procedures, and on the other hand they yield deeper theoretical insights into how a non-monotonic approach works. In the 90‘s Lifschitz and Turner [1,2] proved splitting results for logic programs and default theory. In this paper we establish similar results for Dung style argumentation frameworks (AFs) under the most important semantics, namely stable, preferred, complete and grounded semantics. Furthermore we show how to use these results in dynamical argumentation.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Preview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
References
Lifschitz, V., Turner, H.: Splitting a Logic Program. In: Principles of Knowledge Representation, pp. 23–37. MIT Press, Cambridge (1994)
Turner, H.: Splitting a default theory. In: Proc. AAAI 1996, pp. 645–651 (1996)
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)
Cayrol, C., Dupin de Saint-Cyr, F., Lagasquie-Schiex, M.-C.: Revision of an argumentation system. In: Proc. KR 2008, pp. 124–134 (2008)
Dung, P.M., Mancarella, P., Toni, F.: A dialectic procedure for sceptical, assumption-based argumentation. In: Proc. COMMA 2006, pp. 145–156. IOS Press, Liverpool (2006)
Baumann, R., Brewka, G.: Expanding Argumentation Frameworks: Enforcing and Monotonicity Results. In: Proc. COMMA 2010, pp. 75–86. IOS Press, Amsterdam (2010)
Bench-Capon, T.: Value Based Argumentation Frameworks. In: Benferhat, S., Giunchiglia, E. (eds.) Proc. NMR 2002, Toulouse, France, pp. 443–445 (2002)
Baroni, P., Giacomin, M.: Evaluation and comparison criteria for extension-based argumentation semantics. In: Proc. COMMA 2006, pp. 157–168. IOS Press, Amsterdam (2006)
Oikarinen, E., Woltran, S.: Characterizing Strong Equivalence for Argumentation Frameworks. In: Proc. KR 2010, pp. 123–133. AAAI Press, Menlo Park (2010)
Baroni, P., Giacomin, M., Guida, G.: SCC-recursiveness: a general schema for argumentation semantics. Artificial Intelligence 168(1-2), 162–210 (2005)
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2011 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg
About this paper
Cite this paper
Baumann, R. (2011). Splitting an Argumentation Framework. In: Delgrande, J.P., Faber, W. (eds) Logic Programming and Nonmonotonic Reasoning. LPNMR 2011. Lecture Notes in Computer Science(), vol 6645. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-20895-9_6
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-20895-9_6
Publisher Name: Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg
Print ISBN: 978-3-642-20894-2
Online ISBN: 978-3-642-20895-9
eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)