From Logic Programming to Argumentation and Back

Argumentation has gained popularity in recent years as a knowledge representation formalism to support, in particular, non-monotonic and paraconsistent reasoning. I will trace back the origins of two well-known argumentation frameworks (namely abstact argumentation and assumption-based argumentation) to work on the semantics of logic programming and abductive logic programming in the late eighties and early nineties. I will then discuss recent work with Claudia Schulz on the use of (assumption-based) argumentation to provide justifications for (non-)membership of literals in answer sets, illustrating one way in which argumentation can benefit back logic programming.