Abstract
In this paper, we show that preferences intervene twice in argumentation frameworks: i) to compute standard solutions (i.e. extensions), and ii) to refine those solutions (i.e. to return only the preferred extensions). The two roles are independent and obey to distinct postulates. After introducing and studying the postulates, we provide an example of a formal framework which models the two roles and verifies all the proposed postulates.
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
Amgoud, L., Caminada, M., Cayrol, C., Lagasquie, M., Prakken, H.: Towards a consensual formal model: inference part. Technical report, Deliverable D2.2: Draft Formal Semantics for Inference and Decision-Making. ASPIC project (2004)
Amgoud, L., Cayrol, C.: A reasoning model based on the production of acceptable arguments. Annals of Mathematics and Artificial Int. 34, 197–216 (2002)
Amgoud, L., Vesic, S.: Repairing preference-based argumentation systems. In: IJCAI 2009, pp. 665–670 (2009)
Amgoud, L., Vesic, S.: Generalizing stable semantics by preferences. In: Proceedings of COMMA 2010, pp. 39–50 (2010)
Bench-Capon, T.J.M.: Persuasion in practical argument using value-based argumentation frameworks. J. of Logic and Computation 13(3), 429–448 (2003)
Brewka, G., Niemela, I., Truszczynski, M.: Preferences and nonmonotonic reasoning. AI Magazine, 69–78 (2008)
Dimopoulos, Y., Moraitis, P., Amgoud, L.: Extending argumentation to make good decisions. In: Rossi, F., Tsoukias, A. (eds.) ADT 2009. LNCS, vol. 5783, pp. 225–236. Springer, Heidelberg (2009)
Dung, P.: On the acceptability of arguments and its fundamental role in nonmonotonic reasoning, logic programming and n-person games. AIJ 77, 321–357 (1995)
Kaci, S.: Refined preference-based argumentation framworks. In: Proceedings of COMMA 2010, pp. 299–310 (2010)
Modgil, S.: Reasoning about preferences in argumentation frameworks. AIJ 173(9-10), 901–934 (2009)
Prakken, H.: An abstract framework for argumentation with structured arguments. Journal of Argument and Computation (2010) (in press)
Simari, G., Loui, R.: A mathematical treatment of defeasible reasoning and its implementation. Artificial Intelligence Journal 53, 125–157 (1992)
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
Amgoud, L., Vesic, S. (2011). Two Roles of Preferences in Argumentation Frameworks. In: Liu, W. (eds) Symbolic and Quantitative Approaches to Reasoning with Uncertainty. ECSQARU 2011. Lecture Notes in Computer Science(), vol 6717. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-22152-1_8
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-22152-1_8
Publisher Name: Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg
Print ISBN: 978-3-642-22151-4
Online ISBN: 978-3-642-22152-1
eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)