Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Probabilistic Argumentation Systems and Abduction

  • Published:
Annals of Mathematics and Artificial Intelligence Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Probabilistic argumentation systems are based on assumption-based reasoning for obtaining arguments supporting hypotheses and on probability theory to compute probabilities of supports. Assumption-based reasoning is closely related to hypothetical reasoning or inference through theory formation. The latter approach has well known relations to abduction and default reasoning. In this paper assumption-based reasoning, as an alternative to theory formation aiming at a different goal, will be presented and its use for abduction and model-based diagnostics will be explained. Assumption-based reasoning is well suited for defining a probability structure on top of it. On the base of the relationships between assumption-based reasoning on the one hand and abduction on the other hand, the added value introduced by probability into model based diagnostics will be discussed. Furthermore, the concepts of complete and partial models are introduced with the goal to study the quality of inference procedures. In particular this will be used to compare abductive to possible explanations.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. B. Anrig, R. Bissig, R. Haenni, J. Kohlas and N. Lehmann, Probabilistic argumentation systems: introduction to assumption-based modeling with ABEL, Technical Report 99-1, University of Fribourg, Institute of Informatics, Theoretical Computer Science (1999).

  2. C. Chesñevar, A.G. Maguitman and R.P. Loui, Logical models of argument, Draft for ACM Computing Surveys Logic of Arguments (1998).

  3. A. Darwiche, Model-based diagnosis using structured system descriptions, Artif. Intell. Res. 8 (1998) 165-222.

    Google Scholar 

  4. A. Darwiche, Model-based diagnosis under real-world constraints, AI Magazine 21(2) (2000) 57-73.

    Google Scholar 

  5. D. Dupré, Abductive and consistency-based diagnosis revisited: a modeling perspective, in: Proc. of the 8th International Workshop on Non-Monotonic Reasoning, NMR'2000 (2000).

  6. R. Haenni, Modeling uncertainty with propositional assumption-based systems, in: Applications of Uncertainty Formalisms, eds. S. Parson and A. Hunter, Lecture Notes in Artifical Intelligence, Vol. 1455 (Springer, 1998) pp. 446-470.

  7. R. Haenni, J. Kohlas and N. Lehmann, Probabilistic argumentation systems, in: Defeasible Reasoning and Uncertainty Management Systems: Algorithms, eds. J. Kohlas and S. Moral (Oxford University Press, Oxford, 2000).

    Google Scholar 

  8. A. Kean, The approximation of implicates and explanations, Internat. J. Approx. Reason. 9 (1993) 97-128.

    Google Scholar 

  9. J. Kohlas, B. Anrig, R. Haenni and P.Monney, Model-based diagnostics and probabilistic assumptionbased reasoning, Artif. Intell. 104 (1998) 71-106.

    Google Scholar 

  10. J. Kohlas and P. Monney, A Mathematical Theory of Hints. An Approach to the Dempster-Shafer Theory of Evidence, Lecture Notes in Economics and Mathematical Systems, Vol. 425 (Springer, New York, 1995).

    Google Scholar 

  11. K. Laskey and P. Lehner, Assumptions, beliefs and probabilities, Artif. Intell. 41 (1989) 65-77.

    Google Scholar 

  12. E. Neufeld and D. Poole, Combining logic and probability, Comput. Intell. 4 (1988) 98-99.

    Google Scholar 

  13. J. Pearl, Probabilistic Reasoning in Intelligent Systems: Networks of Plausible Inference (Morgan Kaufmann, 1988).

  14. D. Poole, A logical framework for default reasoning, Artif. Intell. 36 (1988) 27-47.

    Google Scholar 

  15. D. Poole, Representing knowledge for logic-based diagnosis, in: Proc. International Conference of Fifth Generation Computer Systems (1988) pp. 1282-1290.

  16. D. Poole, Normality and faults in logic-based diagnosis, in: Proc. Eleventh International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence (1989) pp. 1304-1310.

  17. G. Provan, A logic-based analysis of Dempster-Shafer theory, Internat. J. Approx. Reason. 4 (1990) 451-495.

    Google Scholar 

  18. R. Reiter, A theory of diagnosis from first principles, Artif. Intell. 32 (1987) 57-95.

    Google Scholar 

  19. G. Shafer, The Mathematical Theory of Evidence (Princeton University Press, Princeton, 1976).

    Google Scholar 

  20. P. Smets, The transferable belief model for quantified belief representation, in: Handbook of Defeasible Reasoning and Uncertainty Management Systems, Vol. 1, eds. D. Gabbay and P. Smets (Kluwer Academic, Dordrecht, 1998) pp. 267-301.

    Google Scholar 

  21. N. Wilson, Algorithms for Dempster-Shafer theory, in: Algorithms for Uncertainty and Defeasible Reasoning, eds. J. Kohlas and S. Moral (Kluwer Academic, Dordrecht, 1999).

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Informatics DIUF, University of Fribourg, CH–1700, Fribourg, Switzerland

    J. Kohlas, D. Berzati & R. Haenni

Authors
  1. J. Kohlas
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. D. Berzati
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. R. Haenni
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Kohlas, J., Berzati, D. & Haenni, R. Probabilistic Argumentation Systems and Abduction. Annals of Mathematics and Artificial Intelligence 34, 177–195 (2002). https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1014482025714

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1014482025714

Search

Navigation