Argumentation semantics and belief change within logic programs
نویسنده
چکیده
Belief change for ordered pairs of extended logic programs is studied in this paper. Several belief change operators are introduced. They map sets of belief sets of given logic programs to resulting sets of belief sets. A belief set is defined as the set of all consequences of a set of default literals. The work is focused on sound (undefeated) sets of default literals, which satisfy conditions of an argumentation semantics. An inertia of a current state and an identification of irrelevant updates are among most interesting properties of the approach.1
منابع مشابه
Revision of Abstract Dialectical Frameworks : Preliminary Report ∗
Abstract Dialectical Frameworks (ADFs) enhance the capability of Dung’s argumentation frameworks by modelling relations between arguments in a flexible way, thus constituting a very general formalism for abstract argumentation. Since argumentation is an inherently dynamic process, understanding how change in ADFs can be formalized is important. In this work we study AGM-style revision operators...
متن کاملInconsistent-tolerant base revision through Argument Theory Change
Reasoning and change over inconsistent knowledge bases (KBs) is of utmost relevance in areas like medicine and law. Argumentation may bring the possibility to cope with both problems. Firstly, by constructing an argumentation framework (AF) from the inconsistent KB, we can decide whether to accept or reject a certain claim through the interplay among arguments and counterarguments. Secondly, by...
متن کاملContradiction in Argumentation Frameworks
We present a theory of argumentation that can deal with contradiction within an argumentation framework, thus solving a problem posed in [1]. By representing logic programs as sets of interacting arguments, we can apply our results for general argumentation frameworks to logicprogramming semantics. This yields a new semantics for logic programs that properly extends traditional approaches such ...
متن کاملIterative Belief Revision in Extended Logic Programming
Extended logic programming augments conventional logic programming with both default and explicit negation. Several semantics for extended logic programs have been proposed that extend the well-founded semantics for logic programs with default negation (called normal programs). We show that two of these extended semantics are intractable; both Dung's grounded argumentation semantics and the wel...
متن کاملComputing Science On the Equivalence between Logic Programming Semantics and Argumentation Semantics
In the current paper, we re-examine the connection between formal argumentation and logic programming from the perspective of semantics. We observe that one particular translation from logic programs to instantiated argumentation (the one described by Wu, Caminada and Gabbay) is able to serve as a basis for describing various equivalences between logic programming semantics and argumentation se...
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 2015