Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

The Same, Similar, or Just Completely Different? Equivalence for Argumentation in Light of Logic

  • Conference paper
Logic, Language, Information, and Computation (WoLLIC 2013)

Part of the book series: Lecture Notes in Computer Science ((LNTCS,volume 8071))

Abstract

In recent years, argumentation theory and logic have moved closer to each other, a development due in large part to Dung’s mathematically precise definition of an abstract argumentation framework as a digraph and the intuitively plausible semantics for argumentation that can be formulated using this structure. This work raises some questions, however, regarding the relationship between an abstract argumentation framework – a directed graph – and the underlying argumentative structure that it is taken to represent. One such question, which we study in this paper, is the question of when two arguments should be considered the same, a question which has been surprisingly controversial, and which also, as we will demonstrate, gives rise to interesting technical results and future challenges.

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 39.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 49.99
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.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Arieli, O., Caminada, M.W.A.: A QBF-based formalization of abstract argumentation semantics. Journal of Applied Logic 11(2), 229–252 (2013)

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  2. 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 

  3. Baumann, R.: Normal and strong expansion equivalence for argumentation frameworks. Artif. Intell. 193, 18–44 (2012)

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  4. Baumann, R.: What does it take to enforce an argument? Minimal change in abstract argumentation. In: De Raedt, L., Bessière, C., Dubois, D., Doherty, P., Frasconi, P., Heintz, F., Lucas, P.J.F. (eds.) ECAI. Frontiers in Artificial Intelligence and Applications, vol. 242, pp. 127–132. IOS Press (2012)

    Google Scholar 

  5. Béziau, J.-Y.: A sequent calculus for Łukasiewicz’s three-valued logic based on Suszko’s bivalent semantics. Bulletin of the Section of Logic 28(2), 89–97 (1998)

    Google Scholar 

  6. Caminada, M.W.A.: Comparing two unique extension semantics for formal argumentation: Ideal and eager. In: BNAIC 2007, pp. 81–87 (2007)

    Google Scholar 

  7. Caminada, M.W.A., Amgoud, L.: On the evaluation of argumentation formalisms. Artificial Intelligence 171(56), 286–310 (2007)

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  8. Caminada, M.W.A., Gabbay, D.M.: A logical account of formal argumentation. Studia Logica 93(2-3), 109–145 (2009)

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  9. Caminada, M.W.A.: Semi-stable semantics. In: Proceedings of the 2006 Conference on Computational Models of Argument: Proceedings of COMMA 2006, pp. 121–130. IOS Press, Amsterdam (2006)

    Google Scholar 

  10. Bench Capon, T.J.M., Dunne, P.E.: Argumentation in artificial intelligence. Artif. Intell. 171(10-15), 619–641 (2007)

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

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

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  12. Dung, P.M., Mancarella, P., Toni, F.: Computing ideal sceptical argumentation. Artificial Intelligence 171(1015), 642–674 (2007)

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  13. Dyrkolbotn, S.: Doing argumentation using theories in graph normal form. In: Rendsvig, R.K. (ed.) ESSLLI 2012 Student Session Proceedings (2012)

    Google Scholar 

  14. Dyrkolbotn, S., Walicki, M.: Propositional discourse logic. Synthese (to appear)

    Google Scholar 

  15. Grossi, D.: Argumentation in the view of modal logic. In: McBurney, P., Rahwan, I., Parsons, S. (eds.) ArgMAS 2010. LNCS, vol. 6614, pp. 190–208. Springer, Heidelberg (2011)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  16. Grossi, D.: On the logic of argumentation theory. In: van der Hoek, W., Kaminka, G.A., Lespérance, Y., Luck, M., Sen, S. (eds.) AAMAS, pp. 409–416. IFAAMAS (2010)

    Google Scholar 

  17. Grossi, D., Gabbay, D.: When are two arguments the same? Invariance in abstract argumentation. Technical Report 4, University of Liverpool (2012)

    Google Scholar 

  18. Oikarinen, E., Woltran, S.: Characterizing strong equivalence for argumentation frameworks. Artificial Intelligence 175(14-15), 1985–2009 (2011)

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  19. Verheij, B.: Two approaches to dialectical argumentation: Admissible sets and argumentation stages. In: Proceedings of the Biannual International Conference on Formal and Applied Practical Reasoning (FAPR) Workshop, pp. 357–368, Universiteit (1996)

    Google Scholar 

  20. Wu, Y., Caminada, M.W.A., Gabbay, D.M.: Complete extensions in argumentation coincide with 3-valued stable models in logic programming. Studia Logica 93(2-3), 383–403 (2009)

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Durham Law School, Durham University, UK

    Sjur Kristoffer Dyrkolbotn

Authors
  1. Sjur Kristoffer Dyrkolbotn
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. School of Informatics, University of Edinburgh, EH8 9AB, Edinburgh, UK

    Leonid Libkin

  2. Fachbereich Mathematik, TU Darmstadt, Schlossgartenstrasse 7, 64289, Darmstadt, Germany

    Ulrich Kohlenbach

  3. Centro de Informática, Universidade Federal de Pernambuco (UFPE), Av. Jornalista Anibal Fernandes, s/n, Cidade Universitária, 50.740-560, Recife, PE, Brazil

    Ruy de Queiroz

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2013 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg

About this paper

Cite this paper

Dyrkolbotn, S.K. (2013). The Same, Similar, or Just Completely Different? Equivalence for Argumentation in Light of Logic. In: Libkin, L., Kohlenbach, U., de Queiroz, R. (eds) Logic, Language, Information, and Computation. WoLLIC 2013. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol 8071. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-39992-3_11

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-39992-3_11

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-642-39991-6

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-642-39992-3

  • eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation