Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Preferred Extensions of Argumentation Frameworks: Query, Answering, and Computation

  • Conference paper
  • First Online:
Automated Reasoning (IJCAR 2001)

Part of the book series: Lecture Notes in Computer Science ((LNAI,volume 2083))

Included in the following conference series:

Abstract

The preferred semantics for argumentation frameworks seems to capture well the intuition behind the stable semantics while avoiding several of its drawbacks. Although the stable semantics has been thoroughly studied, and several algorithms have been proposed for solving problems related to it, it seems that the algorithmic side of the preferred semantics has received less attention. In this paper, we propose algorithms, based on the enumeration of some subsets of a given set of arguments, for the following tasks: 1) deciding if a given argument is in a preferred extension of a given argumentation framework; 2) deciding if the argument is in all the preferred extensions of the framework; 3) generating the preferred extensions of the framework.

Acknowledgements

We would like to thank the referees for helpful comments on an earlier version of the paper. In particular, one of them suggested the call to PrefEnum in order to perform the maximality checks.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 84.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 109.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. A. Bondarenko, P. Dung, R. Kowalski, and F. Toni. An abstract, argumentation-theoretic approach to default reasoning. Art. Int., 93:63–101, 1997.

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  2. C. Berge. Graphs and Hypergraphs, volume 6 of North-Holland Mathematical Library. North-Holland, 1973.

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  3. C. Cayrol, S. Doutre and J. Mengin. Dialectical proof theories for the credulous preferred semantics of argumentation frameworks. Submitted, 2001.

    Google Scholar 

  4. G. Chaty and F. Levy. Default logic and kernel in digraph. Tech. Rep. 91-9, LIPN, 1991.

    Google Scholar 

  5. P. Dung, R. Kowalski, and F. Toni. Synthesis of Proof Procedures for Default Reasoning. In Proceedings of LOPSTR’96, vol. 1207 of LNCS. Springer, 1996.

    Google Scholar 

  6. Y. Dimopoulos and V. Magirou. A graph-theoretic approach to default logic. Information and computation, 112:239–256, 1994.

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  7. S. Doutre and J. Mengin. An Algorithm that Computes the Preferred Extensions of Argumentation Frameworks. In ECAI’2000, Third International Workshop on Computational Dialectics (CD’2000), pages 55–62, August 2000.

    Google Scholar 

  8. S. Doutre and J. Mengin. Preferred extensions of argumentation frameworks: computation and query answering. Tech. Rep. IRIT/2001-03-R, March 2001.

    Google Scholar 

  9. Y. Dimopoulos, V. Magirou, and C. Papadimitriou. On kernels, Defaults and Even Graphs. Annals of Mathematics and AI, 1997.

    Google Scholar 

  10. Y. Dimopoulos, B. Nebel, and F. Toni. Preferred Arguments are Harder to Compute than Stable Extensions. In Proceedings of IJCAI’99, pages 36–41, 1999.

    Google Scholar 

  11. Y. Dimopoulos, B. Nebel, and F. Toni. Finding Admissible and Preferred Arguments Can be Very Hard. In Proceedings of KR’2000, pages 53–61, 2000.

    Google Scholar 

  12. Y. Dimopoulos and A. Torres. Graph-theoretic structures in logic programs and default theories. Tech. Rep. 93-264, Max-Planck-Institut für Informatik, November 1993.

    Google Scholar 

  13. P. Dung. On the acceptability of arguments and its fundamental role in non-monotonic reasoning, logic programming and n-person games. Art. Int., 77:321-57, 1995.

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  14. K. Inoue. Linear resolution for consequence fiing. Art. Int., 56:301-53, 1992.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. F. Levy. Computing Extensions of Default Theories. In R. Kruse and P. Siegel, editors, Proceedings of ECSQAU’91, vol. 548 of LNCS, pages 219-26. Springer, 1991.

    Google Scholar 

  16. I. Niemelä Efficient Default Reasoning. In IJCAI’95, pages 312-18, 1995.

    Google Scholar 

  17. R. Reiter. A Theory of Diagnosis from First Principles. Art. Int., 32:57–95, 1987.

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  18. R. Rymon. Search through Systematic Set Enumeration. In B. Nebel, C. Rich, and W. Swartout, editors, In Proc. of KR’92, pages 539–550. Morgan Kaufmann, 1992.

    Google Scholar 

  19. G. Vreeswijk and H. Prakken. Credulous and Sceptical Argument Games for Preferred Semantics. In Proceedings of JELIA’2000, vol. 1919 of LNAI. Springer, 2000.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Institut de Recherche en Informatique de Toulouse, Université Paul Sabatier, 118 route de Narbonne, F-31062, Toulouse, cedex 4, France

    Sylvie Doutre & Jérôme Mengin

Authors
  1. Sylvie Doutre
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Jérôme Mengin
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Automated Reasoning Project and Department of Computer Science, Australian National University, Canberra, ACT, 0200, Australia

    Rajeev Goré

  2. AG Theoretische Informatik und Logik, Institut für Computersprachen, Technische Universität Wien, Favoritenstr. 9, E185-2, 1040, Wien, Austria

    Alexander Leitsch

  3. Institut für Informatik, Technische Universität München, 80290, München, Germany

    Tobias Nipkow

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2001 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg

About this paper

Cite this paper

Doutre, S., Mengin, J. (2001). Preferred Extensions of Argumentation Frameworks: Query, Answering, and Computation. In: Goré, R., Leitsch, A., Nipkow, T. (eds) Automated Reasoning. IJCAR 2001. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol 2083. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/3-540-45744-5_20

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/3-540-45744-5_20

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-540-42254-9

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-540-45744-2

  • eBook Packages: Springer Book Archive

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation