Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Comparing Argumentation Semantics with Respect to Skepticism

  • Conference paper
Symbolic and Quantitative Approaches to Reasoning with Uncertainty (ECSQARU 2007)

Part of the book series: Lecture Notes in Computer Science ((LNAI,volume 4724))

Abstract

The issue of formalizing skepticism relations between argumentation semantics has been considered only recently in the literature. In this paper, we contribute to this kind of analysis by providing a systematic comparison of a significant set of literature semantics (namely grounded, complete, preferred, stable, semi-stable, ideal, prudent, and CF2 semantics) using both a weak and a strong skepticism relation.

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. Vreeswijk, G.A.W.: Interpolation of benchmark problems in defeasible reasoning. In: Proc. of the 2nd World Conf. on the Fundamentals of Artificial Intelligence (WOCFAI 1995), Paris, France, pp. 453–468 (1995)

    Google Scholar 

  2. Prakken, H.: Intuitions and the modelling of defeasible reasoning: some case studies. In: Proc. of the 9th Int. Workshop on Non-Monotonic Reasoning (NMR 2002), Toulouse, France, pp. 91–102 (2002)

    Google Scholar 

  3. Caminada, M., Amgoud, L.: An axiomatic account of formal argumentation. In: Proc. of the Twentieth National Conf. on Artificial Intelligence (AAAI 2005), Menlo Park, pp. 608–613. AAAI Press, Stanford (2005)

    Google Scholar 

  4. Dung, P.M.: On the acceptability of arguments and its fundamental role in nonmonotonic reasoning, logic programming, and n-person games. Artificial Intelligence 77(2), 321–357 (1995)

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  5. Baroni, P., Giacomin, M.: Evaluation and comparison criteria for extension-based argumentation semantics. In: Proc. of the 1st Int. Conf. on ComputationalModels of Arguments (COMMA 2006), Liverpool, pp. 157–168. IOS Press, Amsterdam (2006)

    Google Scholar 

  6. Baroni, P., Giacomin, M., Guida, G.: Towards a formalization of skepticism in extension-based argumentation semantics. In: Proc. of the 4th Workshop on Computational Models of Natural Argument (CMNA 2004), Valencia, E, pp. 47–52 (2004)

    Google Scholar 

  7. Baroni, P., Giacomin, M.: Solving semantic problems with odd-length cycles in argumentation. In: Nielsen, T.D., Zhang, N.L. (eds.) ECSQARU 2003. LNCS (LNAI), vol. 2711, pp. 440–451. Springer, Heidelberg (2003)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  8. Baroni, P., Giacomin, M., Guida, G.: SCC-recursiveness: a general schema for argumentation semantics. Artificial Intelligence 168(1-2), 165–210 (2005)

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  9. Caminada, M.: Semi-stable semantics. In: Proc. of the 1st Int. Conf. on Computational Models of Arguments (COMMA 2006), Liverpool, pp. 121–130. IOS Press, Amsterdam (2006)

    Google Scholar 

  10. Dung, P.M., Mancarella, P., Toni, F.: A dialectic procedure for sceptical, assumption-based argumentation. In: Proc. of the 1st Int. Conf. on Computational Models of Arguments (COMMA 2006), Liverpool, pp. 145–156. IOS Press, Amsterdam (2006)

    Google Scholar 

  11. Coste-Marquis, S., Devred, C., Marquis, P.: Prudent semantics for argumentation frameworks. In: Proc. of the 17th IEEE Int. Conf. on Tools with Artificial Intelligence (ICTAI 2005), Hong Kong, pp. 568–572. IEEE Computer Society Press, Los Alamitos (2005)

    Google Scholar 

  12. Coste-Marquis, S., Devred, C., Marquis, P.: Sémantiques prudentes pour les systémes dárgumentation. In: Proc. of the 15th Congres AFRIF-AFIA Reconnaissance des Formes et Intelligence Artificielle (RFIA 2006), Tours, F (2006)

    Google Scholar 

  13. Baroni, P., Giacomin, M.: Evaluating argumentation semantics with respect to skepticism adequacy. In: Godo, L. (ed.) ECSQARU 2005. LNCS (LNAI), vol. 3571, pp. 329–340. Springer, Heidelberg (2005)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  14. Baroni, P., Giacomin, M.: On principle-based evaluation, comparison, and design of extension-based argumentation semantics. Tech. Rep., Univ. of Brescia, I (2007)

    Google Scholar 

  15. Prakken, H.: Combining sceptical epistemic reasoning with credulous practical reasoning. In: Proc. of the 1st Int. Conf. on Computational Models of Arguments (COMMA 2006), Liverpool, pp. 311–322. IOS Press, Amsterdam (2006)

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Dip. Elettronica per l’Automazione, University of Brescia, via Branze 38, 25123, Brescia, Italy

    Pietro Baroni & Massimiliano Giacomin

Authors
  1. Pietro Baroni
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Massimiliano Giacomin
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. LARODEC, Institut Supérieur de Gestion de Tunis, 41 Avenue de la liberté, 2000, Le Bardo, Tunisie

    Khaled Mellouli

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2007 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg

About this paper

Cite this paper

Baroni, P., Giacomin, M. (2007). Comparing Argumentation Semantics with Respect to Skepticism. In: Mellouli, K. (eds) Symbolic and Quantitative Approaches to Reasoning with Uncertainty. ECSQARU 2007. Lecture Notes in Computer Science(), vol 4724. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-75256-1_21

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-75256-1_21

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-540-75255-4

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-540-75256-1

  • eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation