Abstract
There have been a number of proposals for using deductive arguments for instantiating abstract argumentation. These take a set of formulae as a knowledgebase, and generate a graph where each node is a logical argument and each arc is a logical attack. This then raises the question of whether for a specific logical argument system S, and for any graph G, there is a knowledgebase such that S generates G. If it holds, then it can be described as a kind of “structural” property of the system. If it fails then, it means that there are situations that cannot be captured by the system. In this paper, we explore some features, and the significance, of such structural properties.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Preview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
References
Cayrol, C.: On the relation between argumentation and non-monotonic coherence-based entailment. In: Proceedings of the Fourteenth International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence (IJCAI 1995), pp. 1443–1448 (1995)
Pollock, J.: Defeasible reasoning. Cognitive Science 11(4), 481–518 (1987)
Besnard, P., Hunter, A.: A logic-based theory of deductive arguments. Artif. Intell. 128, 203–235 (2001)
Amgoud, L., Cayrol, C.: A reasoning model based on the production of acceptable arguments. Annals of Mathematics and Artificial Intelligence 34, 197–215 (2002)
Gorogiannis, N., Hunter, A.: Instantiating abstract argumentation with classical logic arguments: Postulates and properties. Artif. Intell. 175(9-10), 1479–1497 (2011)
Black, E., Hunter, A., Pan, J.Z.: An argument-based approach to using multiple ontologies. In: Godo, L., Pugliese, A. (eds.) SUM 2009. LNCS, vol. 5785, pp. 68–79. Springer, Heidelberg (2009)
García, A., Simari, G.: Defeasible logic programming: An argumentative approach. Theory and Practice of Logic Programming 4, 95–138 (2004)
Hunter, A.: Base logics in argumentation. In: Proceedings of the 3rd Conference on Computational Models of Argument (COMMA 2010). Frontiers in Artificial Intelligence and Applications, vol. 216, pp. 275–286. IOS Press (2010)
Dung, P.: On the acceptability of arguments and its fundamental role in nonmonotonic reasoning, logic programming, and n-person games. Artif. Intell. 77, 321–357 (1995)
Dunne, P.: Computational properties of argument systems satisfying graph-theoretic constraints. Artif. Intell. 171(10-15), 701–729 (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)
Dvořák, W., Szeider, S., Woltran, S.: Abstract argumentation via monadic second order logic. In: Hüllermeier, E., Link, S., Fober, T., Seeger, B. (eds.) SUM 2012. LNCS, vol. 7520, pp. 85–98. Springer, Heidelberg (2012)
Dvorák, W., Pichler, R., Woltran, S.: Towards fixed-parameter tractable algorithms for abstract argumentation. Artif. Intell. 186, 1–37 (2012)
Pollock, J.: How to reason defeasibly. Artif. Intell. 57(1), 1–42 (1992)
Elvang-Gøransson, M., Krause, P., Fox, J.: Acceptability of arguments as ‘logical uncertainty’. In: Moral, S., Kruse, R., Clarke, E. (eds.) ECSQARU 1993. LNCS, vol. 747, pp. 85–90. Springer, Heidelberg (1993)
Elvang-Gøransson, M., Hunter, A.: Argumentative logics: Reasoning with classically inconsistent information. Data & Knowledge Engineering 16(2), 125–145 (1995)
Takahashi, T., Sawamura, H.: A logic of multiple-valued argumentation. In: Proceedings of the 3rd International Joint Conference on Autonomous Agents and Multiagent Systems (AAMAS 2004), pp. 800–807. IEEE Computer Society (2004)
Alsinet, T., Chesñevar, C., Godo, L., Simari, G.: A logic programming framework for possibilistic argumentation: Formalization and logical properties. Fuzzy Sets and Systems 159(10), 1208–1228 (2008)
Augusto, J., Simari, G.: Temporal defeasible reasoning. Knowledge and Information Systems 3(3), 287–318 (2001)
Mann, N., Hunter, A.: Argumentation using temporal knowledge. In: Proceedings of the 2nd Conference on Computational Models of Argument (COMMA 2008). Frontiers in Artificial Intelligence and Applications, vol. 172, pp. 204–215. IOS Press (2008)
Krause, P., Ambler, S., Elvang-Gøransson, M., Fox, J.: A logic of argumentation for reasoning under uncertainty. Computational Intelligence 11, 113–131 (1995)
Fox, J., Das, S.: Safe and Sound: Artificial Intelligence in Hazardous Applications. MIT Press (2000)
Prakken, H.: An abstract framework for argumentation with structured arguments. Argument and Computation 1, 93–124 (2010)
Dung, P., Kowalski, R., Toni, F.: Dialectical proof procedures for assumption-based admissible argumentation. Artificial Intelligence 170, 114–159 (2006)
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2013 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg
About this paper
Cite this paper
Hunter, A., Woltran, S. (2013). Structural Properties for Deductive Argument Systems. In: van der Gaag, L.C. (eds) Symbolic and Quantitative Approaches to Reasoning with Uncertainty. ECSQARU 2013. Lecture Notes in Computer Science(), vol 7958. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-39091-3_24
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-39091-3_24
Publisher Name: Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg
Print ISBN: 978-3-642-39090-6
Online ISBN: 978-3-642-39091-3
eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)