Abstract
Compared to abstract argumentation theory which encapsulates the exact nature of arguments, logic-based argumentation is more specific and represents arguments in formal logic. One significant advantage of logic-based argumentation over abstract argumentation is that it can directly benefit from logical properties such as logical consistency, promoting adherence of an argumentation framework to rational principles. On the other hand, a logical argumentation framework based on classical logic has been also reported of its less-than-desirable utility. In this work we show a way of enhancing utility without sacrificing so much of rationality. We propose a rational argumentation framework with just classical logic sentences and a belief contraction operation. Despite its minimalistic appearance, this framework can characterise attack strengths, allowing us to facilitate coalition profitability and formability semantics we previously defined for abstract argumentation.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution.
Buying options
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Learn about institutional subscriptionsNotes
- 1.
- 2.
In this paper, we will focus on pairwise logical inconsistency only.
References
Alchourrón, C.E., Gärdenfors, P., Makinson, D.: On the logic of theory change: partial meet contraction and revision functions. J. Symb. logic 50, 510–530 (1985)
Amgoud, L., Besnard, P.: Bridging the gap between abstract argumentation systems and logic. In: Godo, L., Pugliese, A. (eds.) SUM 2009. LNCS, vol. 5785, pp. 12–27. Springer, Heidelberg (2009)
Arisaka, R., Satoh, K.: Coalition Formability Semantics with Conflict-Eliminable Sets of Arguments. arXiv e-prints:1605.00495 (2016)
Caminada, M., Amgoud, L.: An axiomatic account of formal argumentation. In: AAAI, pp. 608–613 (2005)
Caminada, M., Amgoud, L.: On the evaluation of argumentation formalisms. Artif. Intell. 171(5–6), 286–310 (2007)
Coste-Marquis, S., Devred, C., Marquis, P.: Symmetric argumentation frameworks. In: Godo, L. (ed.) ECSQARU 2005. LNCS (LNAI), vol. 3571, pp. 317–328. Springer, Heidelberg (2005)
Darwiche, A., Pearl, J.: On the logic of iterated belief revision. Artif. Intell. 89, 1–29 (1997)
Dung, P.M.: On the acceptability of arguments and its fundamental role in nonmonotonic reasoning, logic programming, and n-person games. Artif. Intell. 77(2), 321–357 (1995)
Fuhrmann, A., Hansson, S.O.: A survey of multiple contractions. Logic Lang. Inf. 3(1), 39–75 (1997)
Gabbay, D.M., D’Avila Garcez, A.S.: Logical modes of attack in argumentation networks. Stud. Logica. 93(2), 199–230 (2009)
Gorogiannis, N., Hunter, A.: Instantiating abstract argumentation with classical logic arguments: postulates and properties. Artif. Intell. 175(9–10), 1479–1497 (2011)
Kaci, S., van der Torre, L., Weydert, E.: Acyclic argumentation: attack = conflict + preference. In: ECAI, pp. 725–726 (2006)
Katsuno, H., Mendelzon, A.O.: Propositional knowledge base revision and minimal change. Artif. Intell. 52(3), 263–294 (1991)
Prakken, H.: A study of accrual of arguments, with applications to evidential reasoning. In: ICAIL, pp. 85–94 (2005)
Prakken, H., Sartor, G.: Argument-based extended logic programming with defeasible priorities. J. Appl. Non-class. Logics 7, 25–75 (1997)
Acknowledgement
We thank reviewers for very helpful comments.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2016 Springer International Publishing Switzerland
About this paper
Cite this paper
Arisaka, R., Satoh, K. (2016). Balancing Rationality and Utility in Logic-Based Argumentation with Classical Logic Sentences and Belief Contraction. In: Baldoni, M., Chopra, A., Son, T., Hirayama, K., Torroni, P. (eds) PRIMA 2016: Principles and Practice of Multi-Agent Systems. PRIMA 2016. Lecture Notes in Computer Science(), vol 9862. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-44832-9_10
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-44832-9_10
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-319-44831-2
Online ISBN: 978-3-319-44832-9
eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)