research-article

Interpretations and models for assumption-based argumentation

Authors:

João AlcântaraAuthors Info & Claims

SAC '19: Proceedings of the 34th ACM/SIGAPP Symposium on Applied Computing

Pages 1139 - 1146

https://doi.org/10.1145/3297280.3297392

Published: 08 April 2019 Publication History

Abstract

This work investigates an alternative characterization of semantics for Assumption-Based Argumentation (ABA) frameworks. The semantics of ABA frameworks are traditionally retrieved by the corresponding concepts of assumption extensions and assumption labellings, which only evaluate a subset of literals in the framework's language which are called assumptions. We argue about the interplay of non-assumptions in ABA frameworks and take inspiration from similarities between ABA and Logic Programming (LP) to propose new operations and semantic computation concerning ABA frameworks. To do so, we followed Przymusinski's work on Three-Valued Stable Models for LP to define interpretations and models for ABA frameworks (which also evaluate non-assumptions) and investigate whether this approach provides different results from the original. Amongst other results, we show that our complete model semantics is equivalent to the complete assumption labelling semantics for flat ABA frameworks, but the semi-stable model semantics is not equivalent to the semi-stable assumption labelling semantics.

References

[1]

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

Digital Library

[2]

M.W.A. Caminada. 2006. Semi-Stable Semantics. In Computational Models of Argument; Proceedings of COMMA 2006, P.E. Dunne and TJ.M. Bench-Capon (Eds.). IOS Press, 121--130.

Digital Library

[3]

Martin Caminada, Samy Sá, João Alcântara, and Wolfgang Dvorák. 2015. On the difference between assumption-based argumentation and abstract argumentation. IfCoLog Journal of Logics and their Applications 2 (2015), 15--34. http://www.collegepublications.co.uk/journals/ifcolog/?00003

[4]

Martin Caminada, Samy Sá, João Alcântara, and Wolfgang Dvorák. 2015. On the equivalence between logic programming semantics and argumentation semantics. Int. J. Approx. Reasoning 58 (2015), 87--111.

Digital Library

[5]

Martin Caminada and Claudia Schulz. 2017. On the Equivalence between Assumption-Based Argumentation and Logic Programming. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 60 (2017), 779--825.

Digital Library

[6]

Robert Craven, Francesca Toni, and Matthew Williams. 2013. Graph-based dispute derivations in assumption-based argumentation. In International Workshop on Theorie and Applications of Formal Argumentation. Springer, 46--62.

[7]

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

Digital Library

[8]

P.M. Dung, R.A. Kowalski, and F. Toni. 2009. Assumption-Based Argumentation. In Argumentation in Artificial Intelligence, Guillermo Simari and Iyad Rahwan (Eds.). Springer US, 199--218.

[9]

Th. Eiter, N. Leone, and D. Saccá. 1997. On the partial semantics for disjunctive deductive databases. Ann. Math. Artif. Intell. 19, 1--2 (1997), 59--96.

Digital Library

[10]

Xiuyi Fan and Francesca Toni. 2015. On Computing Explanations in Argumentation. In Proceedings of the Twenty-Ninth AAAI Conference on Artificial Intelligence, January 25--30, 2015, Austin, Texas, USA., Blai Bonet and Sven Koenig (Eds.). AAAI Press, 1496--1502. http://www.aaai.org/ocs/index.php/AAAI/AAAI15/paper/view/9872

Digital Library

[11]

Alejandro J. García and Guillermo R. Simari. 2004. Defeasible Logic Programming: An Argumentative Approach. Theory Pract. Log. Program. 4, 2 (jan 2004), 95--138.

Digital Library

[12]

Sanjay Modgil and Henry Prakken. 2013. A general account of argumentation with preferences. Artificial Intelligence 195 (2013), 361--397.

Digital Library

[13]

T.C. Przymusinski. 1990. The Well-Founded Semantics Coincides with the Three-Valued Stable Semantics. Fundamenta Informaticae 13, 4 (1990), 445--463.

Digital Library

[14]

Claudia Schulz and Francesca Toni. 2014. Complete Assumption Labellings.

[15]

Claudia Schulz and Francesca Toni. 2017. Labellings for assumption-based and abstract argumentation. International Journal of Approximate Reasoning 84 (2017), 110--149.

Digital Library

[16]

Y. Wu, M.W.A. Caminada, and D.M. Gabbay. 2009. Complete Extensions in Argumentation Coincide with 3-Valued Stable Models in Logic Programming. Studia Logica 93, 1--2 (2009), 383--403. Special issue: new ideas in argumentation theory.

Cited By

ALCÂNTARA JCORDEIRO RSÁ S(2024)On the Equivalence between Logic Programming and SETAFTheory and Practice of Logic Programming10.1017/S1471068424000188(1-29)Online publication date: 6-Nov-2024
https://doi.org/10.1017/S1471068424000188
Caminada MHarikrishnan SSá S(2021)Comparing logic programming and formal argumentation; the case of ideal and eager semanticsArgument & Computation10.3233/AAC-20052813:1(93-120)Online publication date: 12-Apr-2021
https://doi.org/10.3233/AAC-200528

Index Terms

Interpretations and models for assumption-based argumentation
1. Computing methodologies
  1. Artificial intelligence
    1. Knowledge representation and reasoning
      1. Nonmonotonic, default reasoning and belief revision
2. Theory of computation
  1. Logic
    1. Automated reasoning

Recommendations

Assumption-Based Argumentation Is Logic Programming with Projection
Symbolic and Quantitative Approaches to Reasoning with Uncertainty
Abstract
We revisit the semantic relations between Assumption-Based Argumentation (ABA) and Logic Programming (LP) based on the recent development of model-based semantics for ABA frameworks. This effort is motivated by the close resemblance between the ...
Computing ideal sceptical argumentation

We present two dialectic procedures for the sceptical ideal semantics for argumentation. The first procedure is defined in terms of dispute trees, for abstract argumentation frameworks. The second procedure is defined in dialectical terms, for ...
Collective Attacks in Assumption-Based Argumentation
SAC '24: Proceedings of the 39th ACM/SIGAPP Symposium on Applied Computing

Conflicts in argumentation-based frameworks are usually described in terms of attacks of arguments, or sets of arguments, on specific counter-arguments. In this paper we consider (assumption-based) argumentation frameworks, in which attacks have a more ...

Comments

Information & Contributors

Information

Published In

cover image ACM Conferences

SAC '19: Proceedings of the 34th ACM/SIGAPP Symposium on Applied Computing

April 2019

2682 pages

ISBN:9781450359337

DOI:10.1145/3297280

Conference Chairs:
Chih-Cheng Hung
Kennesaw State University, Marietta, Georgia
,
George A. Papadopoulos
University of Cyprus, Nicosia, Cyprus

Copyright © 2019 ACM.

Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for components of this work owned by others than the author(s) must be honored. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee. Request permissions from [email protected].

Sponsors

SIGAPP: ACM Special Interest Group on Applied Computing

Publisher

Association for Computing Machinery

New York, NY, United States

Publication History

Published: 08 April 2019

Permissions

Request permissions for this article.

Request Permissions

Check for updates

Author Tags

Qualifiers

Research-article

Funding Sources

CNPq

Conference

SAC '19

Sponsor:

SIGAPP

SAC '19: The 34th ACM/SIGAPP Symposium on Applied Computing

April 8 - 12, 2019

Limassol, Cyprus

Acceptance Rates

Overall Acceptance Rate 1,650 of 6,669 submissions, 25%

Upcoming Conference

SAC '25

Sponsor:
sigapp

The 40th ACM/SIGAPP Symposium on Applied Computing

March 31 - April 4, 2025

Catania , Italy

Contributors

Other Metrics

View Article Metrics

Bibliometrics & Citations

Bibliometrics

Article Metrics

2
Total Citations
View Citations
58
Total Downloads

Downloads (Last 12 months)1
Downloads (Last 6 weeks)0

Reflects downloads up to 05 Mar 2025

Other Metrics

View Author Metrics

Citations

Cited By

ALCÂNTARA JCORDEIRO RSÁ S(2024)On the Equivalence between Logic Programming and SETAFTheory and Practice of Logic Programming10.1017/S1471068424000188(1-29)Online publication date: 6-Nov-2024
https://doi.org/10.1017/S1471068424000188
Caminada MHarikrishnan SSá S(2021)Comparing logic programming and formal argumentation; the case of ideal and eager semanticsArgument & Computation10.3233/AAC-20052813:1(93-120)Online publication date: 12-Apr-2021
https://doi.org/10.3233/AAC-200528

View Options

Login options

Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.

Full Access

Get this Publication

View options

PDF

View or Download as a PDF file.

eReader

View online with eReader.

Figures

Tables

Media

View Table of Conten