Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

A Sequent-Based Representation of Logical Argumentation

  • Conference paper
Computational Logic in Multi-Agent Systems (CLIMA 2013)

Part of the book series: Lecture Notes in Computer Science ((LNAI,volume 8143))

Included in the following conference series:

Abstract

In this paper we propose a new presentation of logic-based argumentation theory through Gentzen-style sequent calculi. We show that arguments may be represented by Gentzen-type sequents and that attacks between arguments may be represented by sequent elimination rules. This framework is logic-independent, i.e., it may be based on arbitrary languages and consequence relations. Moreover, the usual conditions of minimality and consistency of support sets are relaxed, allowing for a more flexible way of expressing arguments, which also simplifies their identification. This generic representation implies that argumentation theory may benefit from incorporating techniques of proof theory and that different non-classical formalisms may be used for backing up intended argumentation semantics.

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 54.99
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., 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)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  2. Amgoud, L., Besnard, P.: A formal analysis of logic-based argumentation systems. In: Deshpande, A., Hunter, A. (eds.) SUM 2010. LNCS, vol. 6379, pp. 42–55. Springer, Heidelberg (2010)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  3. Amgoud, L., Besnard, P., Vesic, S.: Identifying the core of logic-based argumentation systems. In: Proc. ICTAI 2011, pp. 633–636. IEEE (2011)

    Google Scholar 

  4. Arieli, O., Avron, A.: The value of the four values. Artificial Intelligence 102(1), 97–141 (1998)

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  5. Avron, A.: A constructive analysis of RM. J. Symbolic Logic 52, 939–951 (1987)

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  6. Baroni, P., Caminada, M.W.A., Giacomin, M.: An introduction to argumentation semantics. The Knowledge Engineering Review 26(4), 365–410 (2011)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Baroni, P., Giacomin, M.: Semantics for abstract argumentation systems. In: Rahwan, Simary (eds.) [32], pp. 25–44

    Google Scholar 

  8. Batens, D.: Dynamic dialectical logics. In: Priest, G., Routely, R., Norman, J. (eds.) Paraconsistent Logic. Essay on the Inconsistent, pp. 187–217. Philosophia Verlag (1989)

    Google Scholar 

  9. Batens, D.: A survey on inconsistency-adaptive logics. In: Batens, D., Mortensen, C., Priest, G., Van Bendegem, J. (eds.) Frontiers of Paraconsistent Logic. Studies in Logic and Computation, vol. 8, pp. 69–73. Research Studies Press (2000)

    Google Scholar 

  10. Belnap, N.D.: A useful four-valued logic. In: Dunn, M., Epstein, G. (eds.) Modern Uses of Multiple-Valued Logics, pp. 7–37. Reidel Publishing (1977)

    Google Scholar 

  11. Besnard, P., Grégoire, É., Piette, C., Raddaoui, B.: MUS-based generation of arguments and counter-arguments. In: Proc. IRI 2010, pp. 239–244. IEEE (2010)

    Google Scholar 

  12. Besnard, P., Hunter, A.: A logic-based theory of deductive arguments. Artificial Intelligence 128(1-2), 203–235 (2001)

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  13. Besnard, P., Hunter, A.: Argumentation based on classical logic. In: Rahwan, Simary (eds.) [32], pp. 133–152

    Google Scholar 

  14. Besnard, P., Hunter, A., Woltran, S.: Encoding deductive argumentation in quantified boolean formulae. Artificial Intelligence 173(15), 1406–1423 (2009)

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  15. Brünnler, K.: Nested Sequents. PhD thesis, Institut für Informatik und Angewandte Mathematik, Universität Bern (2010)

    Google Scholar 

  16. Caminada, M.W.A.: Contamination in formal argumentation systems. In: Proc. BNAIC 2005, pp. 59–65 (2005)

    Google Scholar 

  17. Caminada, M.W.A.: Semi-stable semantics. In: Dunne, P.E., Bench-Capon, T.J.M. (eds.) Proc. COMMA 2006, pp. 121–130. IOS Press (2006)

    Google Scholar 

  18. Caminada, M.W.A., Carnielli, W.A., Dunne, P.E.: Semi-stable semantics. Journal of Logic and Computation 22(5), 1207–1254 (2012)

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  19. Caminada, M.W.A., Vesic, S.: On extended conflict-freeness in argumentation. In: Uiterwijk, J., Roos, N., Winands, M. (eds.) Proc. BNAIC 2012, pp. 43–50 (2012)

    Google Scholar 

  20. Chesñevar, C.I., Maguitman, A.G., Loui, R.P.: Logical models of argument. ACM Computing Surveys 32(4), 337–383 (2000)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. da Costa, N.C.A.: On the theory of inconsistent formal systems. Notre Dame Journal of Formal Logic 15, 497–510 (1974)

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  22. 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 

  23. Dung, P.M., Mancarella, P., Toni, F.: Computing ideal sceptical argumentation. Artificial Intelligence 171(10-15), 642–674 (2007)

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  24. Efstathiou, V., Hunter, A.: Algorithms for generating arguments and counterarguments in propositional logic. Journal of Approximate Reasoning 52(6), 672–704 (2011)

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  25. Eiter, T., Gottlob, G.: The complexity of logic-based abduction. Journal of the ACM 42, 3–42 (1995)

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  26. Gentzen, G.: Investigations into logical deduction (1934) (in German); An English translation appears in ‘The Collected Works of Gerhard Gentzen’, edited by M. E. Szabo. North-Holland (1969)

    Google Scholar 

  27. Gorogiannis, N., Hunter, A.: Instantiating abstract argumentation with classical logic arguments: Postulates and properties. Artificial Intelligence 175(9-10), 1479–1497 (2011)

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  28. Pollock, J.L.: Defeasible reasoning. Cognitive Science 11(4), 481–518 (1987)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. Pollock, J.L.: How to reason defeasibly. Artificial Intelligence 57, 1–42 (1992)

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  30. Prakken, H., Vreeswijk, G.: Logical systems for defeasible argumentation. In: Gabbay, D., Guenthner, F. (eds.) Handbook of Philosochical Logic, vol. 14, pp. 219–318. Kluwer Academic Publishers (2002)

    Google Scholar 

  31. Priest, G.: Reasoning about truth. Artificial Intelligence 39, 231–244 (1989)

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  32. Rahwan, I., Simari, G.R.: Argumentation in Artificial Intelligence. Springer (2009)

    Google Scholar 

  33. Simari, G.R., Loui, R.P.: A mathematical treatment of defeasible reasoning and its implementation. Artificial Intelligence 53(2-3), 125–157 (1992)

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. School of Computer Science, The Academic College of Tel-Aviv, Israel

    Ofer Arieli

Authors
  1. Ofer Arieli
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. CENTRIA and Departamento de Informática, Universidade Nova de Lisboa, Campus de Caparica, 2829-516, Caparica, Portugal

    João Leite

  2. Department of Computer Science, New Mexico State University, 88003, Las Cruces, NM, USA

    Tran Cao Son

  3. Dipartimento di Informatica: Scienza e Ingegneria (DISI), University of Bologna, V.le Risorgimento 2, 40136, Bologna, Italy

    Paolo Torroni

  4. Computer Science and Communication Lab, University of Luxembourg, 6 Rue Richard Coudenhove-Kalergi, 1359, Luxembourg, Luxembourg

    Leon van der Torre

  5. Institute of Information Systems, Vienna University of Technology, Favoritenstraße 9-11, 1040, Vienna, Austria

    Stefan Woltran

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2013 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg

About this paper

Cite this paper

Arieli, O. (2013). A Sequent-Based Representation of Logical Argumentation. In: Leite, J., Son, T.C., Torroni, P., van der Torre, L., Woltran, S. (eds) Computational Logic in Multi-Agent Systems. CLIMA 2013. Lecture Notes in Computer Science(), vol 8143. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-40624-9_5

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-40624-9_5

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-642-40623-2

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-642-40624-9

  • eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation