Location via proxy:   [ UP ]  
[Report a bug]   [Manage cookies]                
skip to main content
article

Skepticism relations for comparing argumentation semantics

Published: 01 June 2009 Publication History

Abstract

The issue of formalizing skepticism relations between argumentation semantics has been considered only recently in the literature. In this paper we provide a twofold contribution to this kind of analysis. First, starting from the traditional concepts of skeptical and credulous acceptance, we introduce a comprehensive set of seven skepticism relations, which provide a formal counterpart to several alternative notions of skepticism at an intuitive level. Then we carry out a systematic comparison of a significant set of literature semantics (namely grounded, complete, preferred, stable, semi-stable, ideal, prudent and CF2 semantics) on the basis of the proposed skepticism relations.

References

[1]
G.A.W. Vreeswijk, Interpolation of benchmark problems in defeasible reasoning, in: Proceedings of the Second World Conference on the Fundamentals of Artificial Intelligence (WOCFAI 95), Paris, France, 1995, pp. 453--468.
[2]
H. Prakken, Intuitions and the modelling of defeasible reasoning: some case studies, in: Proceedings of the Ninth International Workshop on Non-Monotonic Reasoning (NMR 2002), Toulouse, France, 2002, pp. 91--102.
[3]
M. Caminada, L. Amgoud, An axiomatic account of formal argumentation, in: Proceedings of the 20th National Conference on Artificial Intelligence (AAAI-05), American Association for Artificial Intelligence, AAAI Press, Menlo Park, CA, 2005, pp. 608--613.
[4]
Dung, P.M., On the acceptability of arguments and its fundamental role in nonmonotonic reasoning, logic programming, and n-person games. Artificial Intelligence. v77 i2. 321-357.
[5]
P. Baroni, M. Giacomin, Evaluation and comparison criteria for extension-based argumentation semantics, in: P.E. Dunne, T. Bench-Capon (Eds.), Proceedings of the First International Conference on Computational Models of Argument (COMMA 2006), IOS Press, Liverpool, UK, 2006, pp. 157--168.
[6]
Prakken, H. and Vreeswijk, G.A.W., Logics for defeasible argumentation. In: Gabbay, D.M., Guenthner, F. (Eds.), Handbook of Philosophical Logic, Kluwer Academic Publishers, Dordrecht.
[7]
M. Caminada, Semi-stable semantics, in: P.E. Dunne, T. Bench-Capon (Eds.), Proceedings of the First International Conference on Computational Models of Argument (COMMA 2006), IOS Press, Liverpool, UK, 2006, pp. 121--130.
[8]
Baroni, P., Giacomin, M. and Guida, G., SCC-recursiveness: a general schema for argumentation semantics. Artificial Intelligence. v168 i1--2. 165-210.
[9]
S. Coste-Marquis, C. Devred, P. Marquis, Prudent semantics for argumentation frameworks, in: Proceedings of the 17th IEEE International Conference on Tools with Artificial Intelligence (ICTAI 2005), IEEE Computer Society, Hong Kong, China, 2005, pp. 568--572.
[10]
M. Caminada, On the issue of reinstatement in argumentation, in: Proceedings of the 10th European Conference on Logics in Artificial Intelligence (JELIA 06), Springer, Liverpool, UK, 2006, pp. 111--123.
[11]
Baroni, P. and Giacomin, M., On principle-based evaluation of extension-based argumentation semantics. Artificial Intelligence (Special issue on Argumentation in A.I.). v171 i10/15. 675-700.
[12]
Bondarenko, A., Dung, P.M., Kowalski, R.A. and Toni, F., An abstract, argumentation-theoretic approach to default reasoning. Artificial Intelligence. v93 i1--2. 63-101.
[13]
P. Baroni, M. Giacomin, Solving semantic problems with odd-length cycles in argumentation, in: Proceedings of the Seventh European Conference on Symbolic and Quantitative Approaches to Reasoning with Uncertainty (ECSQARU 2003), LNAI 2711, Springer-Verlag, Aalborg, Denmark, 2003, pp. 440--451.
[14]
P.M. Dung, P. Mancarella, F. Toni, A dialectic procedure for sceptical, assumption-based argumentation, in: P.E. Dunne, T. Bench-Capon (Eds.), Proceedings of the First International Conference on Computational Models of Argument (COMMA 2006), IOS Press, Liverpool, UK, 2006, pp. 145--156.
[15]
S. Coste-Marquis, C. Devred, P. Marquis, Sémantiques prudentes pour les systèmes d'argumentation, in: Proceedings of the 15th Congres Reconnaissance des Formes et Intelligence Artificielle (RFIA 2006), Tours, F, 2006.
[16]
P. Baroni, M. Giacomin, G. Guida, Towards a formalization of skepticism in extension-based argumentation semantics, in: Proceedings of the Fourth Workshop on Computational Models of Natural Argument (CMNA 2004), Valencia, Spain, 2004, pp. 47--52.
[17]
P. Baroni, M. Giacomin, Evaluating argumentation semantics with respect to skepticism adequacy, in: Proceedings of the Eighth European Conference on Symbolic and Quantitative Approaches to Reasoning with Uncertainty (ECSQARU 2005), Barcelona, E, 2005, pp. 329--340.
[18]
P. Baroni, M. Giacomin, Comparing argumentation semantics with respect to skepticism, in: Proceedings of the Ninth European Conference on Symbolic and Quantitative Approaches to Reasoning with Uncertainty (ECSQARU 2007), Hammamet, TN, 2007, pp. 210--221.
[19]
D.S. Touretzky, J.F. Horty, R.H. Thomason, A clash of intuitions: the current state of nonmonotonic multiple inheritance systems, in: J. McDermott (Ed.), Proceedings of IJCAI-87, Morgan Kaufmann, Milan, Italy, 1987, pp. 476--482.
[20]
Simari, G.R. and Loui, R.P., A mathematical treatment of defeasible reasoning and its implementation. Artificial Intelligence. v53 i2--3. 125-157.
[21]
Dung, P.M. and Son, T.C., An argument-based approach to reasoning with specificity. Artificial Intelligence. v133. 35-85.
[22]
Lifschitz, V., Pearce, D. and Valverde, A., Strongly equivalent logic programs. ACM Transactions on Computational Logic. v2 i4. 526-541.
[23]
T. Eiter, M. Fink, Uniform equivalence of logic programs under the stable model semantics, in: Proceedings of 19th International Conference on Logic Programming (ICLP 2003), Springer, 2003, pp. 224--238.
[24]
You, J.-H. and Yuan, L.-Y., On the equivalence of semantics for normal logic programs. Journal of Logic Programming. v20 i1. 79-89.
[25]
Schweimeier, R. and Schroeder, M., A parameterised hierarchy of argumentation semantics for extended logic programming and its application to the well-founded semantics. Theory and Practice of Logic Programming. v5 i1--2. 207-242.
[26]
H. Prakken, Combining sceptical epistemic reasoning with credulous practical reasoning, in: P.E. Dunne, T. Bench-Capon (Eds.), Proceedings of the First International Conference on Computational Models of Argument (COMMA 2006), IOS Press, Liverpool, UK, 2006, pp. 311--322.

Cited By

View all

Recommendations

Comments

Information & Contributors

Information

Published In

cover image International Journal of Approximate Reasoning
International Journal of Approximate Reasoning  Volume 50, Issue 6
June, 2009
107 pages

Publisher

Elsevier Science Inc.

United States

Publication History

Published: 01 June 2009

Author Tags

  1. Argumentation semantics
  2. Argumentation theory
  3. Skepticism relations

Qualifiers

  • Article

Contributors

Other Metrics

Bibliometrics & Citations

Bibliometrics

Article Metrics

  • Downloads (Last 12 months)0
  • Downloads (Last 6 weeks)0
Reflects downloads up to 06 Jan 2025

Other Metrics

Citations

Cited By

View all
  • (2022)Belief Revision and Computational Argumentation: A Critical ComparisonJournal of Logic, Language and Information10.1007/s10849-022-09369-831:4(555-589)Online publication date: 1-Dec-2022
  • (2019)Ordering Argumentation FrameworksSymbolic and Quantitative Approaches to Reasoning with Uncertainty10.1007/978-3-030-29765-7_8(87-98)Online publication date: 18-Sep-2019
  • (2018)Activity qualifiers using an argument-based constructionKnowledge and Information Systems10.1007/s10115-017-1112-754:3(633-658)Online publication date: 1-Mar-2018
  • (2014)On the Input/Output behavior of argumentation frameworksArtificial Intelligence10.1016/j.artint.2014.08.004217:C(144-197)Online publication date: 1-Dec-2014
  • (2012)Minimal hypothesesAnnals of Mathematics and Artificial Intelligence10.1007/s10472-012-9308-865:2-3(245-283)Online publication date: 1-Jul-2012
  • (2011)Review: an introduction to argumentation semanticsThe Knowledge Engineering Review10.1017/S026988891100016626:4(365-410)Online publication date: 1-Dec-2011
  • (2011)Dynamics of argumentation systemsArtificial Intelligence10.1016/j.artint.2011.03.006175:11(1790-1814)Online publication date: 1-Jul-2011
  • (2011)Characterization of argumentation semantics in terms of the MM semanticsProceedings of the 10th Mexican international conference on Advances in Artificial Intelligence - Volume Part I10.1007/978-3-642-25324-9_2(16-27)Online publication date: 26-Nov-2011
  • (2010)Classification and strategical issues of argumentation games on structured argumentation frameworksProceedings of the 9th International Conference on Autonomous Agents and Multiagent Systems: volume 1 - Volume 110.5555/1838206.1838368(1247-1254)Online publication date: 10-May-2010
  • (2010)On strategic argument selection in structured argumentation systemsProceedings of the 7th international conference on Argumentation in Multi-Agent Systems10.1007/978-3-642-21940-5_17(286-305)Online publication date: 10-May-2010

View Options

View options

Media

Figures

Other

Tables

Share

Share

Share this Publication link

Share on social media