On Acceptability in Abstract Argumentation Frameworks with an Extended Defeat Relation
نویسندگان
چکیده
Defeat between arguments is established by a combination of two basic elements: a conflict or defeat relation, and a preference relation on the arguments involved in this conflict. We present a new abstract framework for argumentation where two kinds of defeat are present, depending on the outcome of the preference relation: an argument may be a proper defeater or a blocking defeater of another argument. An operator is used to characterize the set of accepted arguments. This operator also provides a method for identifying controversial situations.
منابع مشابه
Strong and weak forms of abstract argument defense
Extended abstract frameworks separate conflicts and preference between arguments. These elements are combined to induce argument defeat relations. A proper defeat is consequence of preferring an argument in a conflicting pair, while blocking defeat is consequence of incomparable or equivalent-in-strength conflicting arguments. As arguments interact with different strengths, the quality of sever...
متن کاملArgumentation Frameworks with Necessities
In this paper, we introduce argumentation frameworks with necessities (AFNs), an extension of Dung’s argumentation frameworks (AFs) taking into account a necessity relation as a kind of support relation between arguments (an argument is necessary for another). We redefine the acceptability semantics for these extended frameworks and we show how the necessity relation allows a direct and easy co...
متن کاملProgressive Defeat Paths in Abstract Argumentation Frameworks
Abstract argumentation systems are formalisms for defeasible reasoning where some components remain unspecified, the structure of arguments being the main abstraction. In the dialectical process carried out to identify accepted arguments in the system some controversial situations may appear. These relate to the reintroduction of arguments into the process which cause the onset of circularity. ...
متن کاملAbstract Rule-Based Argumentation
Rule-Based Argumentation Sanjay Modgil, Henry Prakken abstract. This chapter reviews abstract rule-based approaches to argumentation, in particular the ASPIC framework. In ASPIC and its This chapter reviews abstract rule-based approaches to argumentation, in particular the ASPIC framework. In ASPIC and its predecessors, going back to the seminal work of John Pollock, arguments can be formed by ...
متن کاملMechanism design for abstract argumentation
Since their introduction by Dung over a decade ago, abstract argumentation frameworks have received increasing interest in artificial intelligence as a convenient model for reasoning about general characteristics of argument. Such a framework consists of a set of arguments and a binary defeat relation among them. Various semantic and computational approaches have been developed to characterise ...
متن کاملذخیره در منابع من
با ذخیره ی این منبع در منابع من، دسترسی به آن را برای استفاده های بعدی آسان تر کنید
عنوان ژورنال:
دوره شماره
صفحات -
تاریخ انتشار 2006