Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

An Argumentation Framework Based on Conditional Priorities

  • Conference paper
Book cover PRICAI 2008: Trends in Artificial Intelligence (PRICAI 2008)

Part of the book series: Lecture Notes in Computer Science ((LNAI,volume 5351))

Included in the following conference series:

  • 1332 Accesses

Abstract

We propose a framework to allow an agent to cope with inconsistent beliefs and to handle conflicting inferences. Our approach is based on a well-established line of research on assumption-based argumentation frameworks and defeasible reasoning. We propose a language to allow defeasible assumptions and context-sensitive priorities to be explicitly expressed and reasoned about by the agent. Our work reveals some interesting problems to conditional priority-based argumentation and establishes the fundamental properties of these frameworks. We also establish a sufficient condition for a conditional priority-based argumentation to have a unique stable extension based on the notion of stratification.

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 129.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 169.99
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. Amgoud, L., Cayrol, C.: Inferring from inconsistency in preference-based argumentation frameworks. J. Autom. Reason. 29(2), 125–169 (2002)

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  2. Antoniou, G.: Defeasible logic with dynamic priorities. Int. J. Intell. Syst. 19(5), 463–472 (2004)

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  3. Apt, K.R., Blair, H.A.: Arithmetic classification of perfect models of stratified programs. Fundam. Inform. 14(3), 339–343 (1991)

    MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  4. Apt, K.R., Blair, H.A., Walker, A.: Towards a theory of declarative knowledge. In: Minker, J. (ed.) Foundations of deductive databases and logic programming, pp. 89–148. Morgan Kaufmann Publishers Inc., San Francisco (1988)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  5. Bench-Capon, T.J.M.: Persuasion in Practical Argument Using Value-based Argumentation Frameworks. J Logic Computation 13(3), 429–448 (2003)

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  6. Bondarenko, A., Dung, P.M., Kowalski, R.A., Toni, F.: An abstract, argumentation-theoretic approach to default reasoning. Artificial Intelligence Journal 93, 63–101 (1997)

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  7. Brewka, G.: Reasoning about priorities in default logic. In: AAAI, pp. 940–945 (1994)

    Google Scholar 

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

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  9. Dung, P.M., Mancarella, P., Toni, F.: Computing ideal sceptical argumentation. Artif. Intell. 171(10-15), 642–674 (2007)

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  10. Dung, P.M., Son, T.C.: An argument-based approach to reasoning with specificity. Artif. Intell. 133(1-2), 35–85 (2001)

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  11. Elvang-Gøransson, M., Hunter, A.: Argumentative logics: Reasoning with classically inconsistent information. Data Knowl. Eng. 16(2), 125–145 (1995)

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  12. Elvang-Gøransson, M., Krause, P., Fox, J.: Acceptability of arguments as ‘logical uncertainty’. In: ECSQARU, pp. 85–90 (1993)

    Google Scholar 

  13. Gelfond, M.: On stratified autoepistemic theories. In: AAAI, pp. 207–211 (1987)

    Google Scholar 

  14. Governatori, G., Maher, M.J., Antoniou, G., Billington, D.: Argumentation semantics for defeasible logic. J. Log. Comput. 14(5), 675–702 (2004)

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  15. Horty, J.F., Thomason, R.H., Touretzky, D.S.: A skeptical theory of inheritance in nonmonotonic semantic networks. Artif. Intell. 42(2-3), 311–348 (1990)

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  16. Prakken, H., Sartor, G.: Argument-based extended logic programming with defeasible priorities. Journal of Applied Non–classical Logics 7, 25–75 (1997)

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  17. Vo, Q.B., Foo, N.Y.: Reasoning about action: An argumentation-theoretic approach. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 24, 465–518 (2005)

    MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  18. Vo, Q.B., Foo, N.Y., Thurbon, J.: Semantics for a theory of defeasible reasoning. Annals of Mathematics and Artificial Intelligence 44(1-2), 87–119 (2005)

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Centre for Complex Systems and Services (CS3) Faculty of Information & Communication Technologies, Swinburne University of Technology, Australia

    Quoc Bao Vo

Authors
  1. Quoc Bao Vo
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Japan Advanced Institute of Science and Technology, Asahidai 1-1, 923-12292, Nomi, Japan

    Tu-Bao Ho

  2. Department of Computer Science & Technology, Nanjing University, 22 Hankou Road, 210093, China

    Zhi-Hua Zhou

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2008 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg

About this paper

Cite this paper

Vo, Q.B. (2008). An Argumentation Framework Based on Conditional Priorities. In: Ho, TB., Zhou, ZH. (eds) PRICAI 2008: Trends in Artificial Intelligence. PRICAI 2008. Lecture Notes in Computer Science(), vol 5351. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-89197-0_46

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-89197-0_46

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-540-89196-3

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-540-89197-0

  • eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation