Article

On the computational complexity of naive-based semantics for abstract dialectical frameworks

Authors:

Sarah Alice Gaggl,

Sebastian Rudolph,

Hannes StrassAuthors Info & Claims

IJCAI'15: Proceedings of the 24th International Conference on Artificial Intelligence

Pages 2985 - 2991

Published: 25 July 2015 Publication History

Abstract

Abstract dialectical frameworks (ADFs) are a powerful generalization of Dung's abstract argumentation frameworks. ADFs allow to model argumentation scenarios such that ADF semantics then provide interpretations of the scenarios. Among the considerable number of ADF semantics, the naive-based ones are built upon the fundamental concept of conflict-freeness. Intuitively, a three-valued interpretation of an ADF's statements is conflict-free iff all true statements can possibly be accepted, and all false statements cannot possibly be accepted. In this paper, we perform an exhaustive analysis of the computational complexity of naive-based semantics. The results are quite interesting, for some of them involve little-known classes of the so-called Boolean hierarchy (another hierarchy in between classes of the polynomial hierarchy). Furthermore in credulous and sceptical entailment, the complexity can be different depending on whether we check for truth or falsity of a specific statement.

References

[1]

Leila Amgoud and Claudette Cayrol. A reasoning model based on the production of acceptable arguments. Annals of Mathematics and Artificial Intelligence, 34(1-3):197-215, 2002.

Digital Library

[2]

Leila Amgoud, Claudette Cayrol, Marie-Christine Lagasquie-Schiex, and Pierre Livet. On bipolarity in argumentation frameworks. International Journal of Intelligent Systems, 23:1-32, 2008.

Digital Library

[3]

Pietro Baroni, Massimiliano Giacomin, and Giovanni Guida. SCC-recursiveness: A general schema for argumentation semantics. Artificial Intelligence, 168(1-2):162-210, 2005.

Digital Library

[4]

Trevor J. M. Bench-Capon. Persuasion in practical argument using value-based argumentation frameworks. Journal of Logic and Computation, 13(3):429-448, 2003.

[5]

Gerhard Brewka and Thomas F. Gordon. Carneades and abstract dialectical frameworks: A reconstruction. In Pietro Baroni, Federico Cerutti, Massimiliano Giacomin, and Guillermo Ricardo Simari, editors, Proceedings of the Third International Conference on Computational Models of Argument (COMMA), volume 216 of FAIA, pages 3-12. IOS Press, 2010.

Digital Library

[6]

Gerhard Brewka and Stefan Woltran. Abstract Dialectical Frameworks. In Fangzhen Lin, Ulrike Sattler, and Miroslaw Truszczynski, editors, Proceedings of the Twelfth International Conference on Principles of Knowledge Representation and Reasoning (KR), pages 102-111. AAAI Press, 2010.

[7]

Gerhard Brewka, Hannes Strass, Stefan Ellmauthaler, Johannes P. Wallner, and Stefan Woltran. Abstract Dialectical Frameworks Revisited. In Francesca Rossi, editor, Proceedings of the Twenty-Third International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence (IJCAI), pages 803-809. IJCAI/AAAI, 2013.

Digital Library

[8]

Richard Chang and Jim Kadin. The Boolean hierarchy and the polynomial hierarchy: A closer connection. SIAM Journal on Computing, 25(2):340-354, 1996.

Digital Library

[9]

Martin Diller, Johannes P. Wallner, and Stefan Woltran. Reasoning in abstract dialectical frameworks using quantified boolean formulas. In Parsons et al. [2014], pages 241-252.

[10]

Phan M. Dung. On the Acceptability of Arguments and its Fundamental Role in Nonmonotonic Reasoning, Logic Programming and n-Person Games. Artificial Intelligence, 77(2):321-358, 1995.

Digital Library

[11]

Paul E. Dunne, Anthony Hunter, Peter McBurney, Simon Parsons, and Michael Wooldridge. Weighted argument systems: Basic definitions, algorithms, and complexity results. Artificial Intelligence, 175(2):457-486, 2011.

Digital Library

[12]

Stefan Ellmauthaler and Hannes Strass. The DIAMOND system for computing with abstract dialectical frameworks. In Parsons et al. [2014], pages 233-240.

[13]

Sarah A. Gaggl and Wolfgang Dvořák. Stage semantics and the SCC-recursive schema for argumentation semantics. Journal of Logic and Computation, 2014.

[14]

Sarah A. Gaggl and Hannes Strass. Decomposing abstract dialectical frameworks. In Parsons et al. [2014], pages 281-292.

[15]

Hengfei Li, Nir Oren, and Timothy J. Norman. Probabilistic argumentation frameworks. In Sanjay Modgil, Nir Oren, and Francesca Toni, editors, Revised Selected Papers of the First International Workshop on Theory and Applications of Formal Argumentation (TAFA), volume 7132 of LNCS, pages 1-16. Springer, 2011.

Digital Library

[16]

Christos H. Papadimitriou and Mihalis Yannakakis. The complexity of facets (and some facets of complexity). In Harry R. Lewis, Barbara B. Simons, Walter A. Burkhard, and Lawrence H. Landweber, editors, Proceedings of the Fourteenth Annual ACM Symposium on Theory of Computing (STOC), pages 255-260. ACM, 1982.

Digital Library

[17]

Simon Parsons, Nir Oren, Chris Reed, and Federico Cerutti, editors. Proceedings of the Fifth International Conference on Computational Models of Argument (COMMA), volume 266 of FAIA. IOS Press, 2014.

[18]

Sylwia Polberg and Dragan Doder. Probabilistic abstract dialectical frameworks. In Eduardo Fermé and João Leite, editors, Proceedings of the Fourteenth European Conference on Logics in Artificial Intelligence (JELIA), volume 8761 of LNCS, pages 591-599. Springer, 2014.

Digital Library

[19]

Iyad Rahwan, Guillermo R. Simari, and Johan van Benthem. Argumentation in artificial intelligence, volume 47. Springer, 2009.

Digital Library

[20]

Hannes Strass and Johannes P. Wallner. Analyzing the Computational Complexity of Abstract Dialectical Frameworks via Approximation Fixpoint Theory. In Chitta Baral, Giuseppe De Giacomo, and Thomas Eiter, editors, Proceedings of the Fourteenth International Conference on Principles of Knowledge Representation and Reasoning (KR), pages 101-110. AAAI Press, 2014.

[21]

Hannes Strass. Approximating operators and semantics for abstract dialectical frameworks. Artificial Intelligence, 205:39-70, 2013.

Digital Library

[22]

Bart Verheij. Two approaches to dialectical argumentation: Admissible sets and argumentation stages. In J.-J. Ch. Meyer and L. C. van der Gaag, editors, Proceedings of the Eighth Dutch Conference on Artificial Intelligence (NAIC), pages 357-368, 1996.

[23]

Gerd Wechsung. On the Boolean closure of NP. In Lothar Budach, editor, Proceedings of the International Conference on Fundamentals of Computation Theory (FCT), volume 199 of LNCS, pages 485-493. Springer, 1985.

Digital Library

Cited By

Gaggl SRudolph SStraß H(2021)On the Decomposition of Abstract Dialectical Frameworks and the Complexity of Naive-based SemanticsJournal of Artificial Intelligence Research10.1613/jair.1.1134870(1-64)Online publication date: 4-Jan-2021
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1613/jair.1.11348

Index Terms

On the computational complexity of naive-based semantics for abstract dialectical frameworks
1. Theory of computation
  1. Logic

Index terms have been assigned to the content through auto-classification.

Recommendations

Carneades and Abstract Dialectical Frameworks: A Reconstruction
Proceedings of the 2010 conference on Computational Models of Argument: Proceedings of COMMA 2010

Carneades is a rather general framework for argumentation. Unlike many other approaches, Carneades captures a number of aspects, like proof burdens, proof standards etc., which are of central importance, in particular in legal argumentation.

In this ...
Computational Complexity of Semi-stable Semantics in Abstract Argumentation Frameworks
JELIA '08: Proceedings of the 11th European conference on Logics in Artificial Intelligence

Semi-stable semantics offer a further extension based formalism by which the concept of "collection of justified arguments" in abstract argumentation frameworks may be described. In contrast to the better known stable semantics, one advantage of semi-...
Approximating operators and semantics for abstract dialectical frameworks

We provide a systematic in-depth study of the semantics of abstract dialectical frameworks (ADFs), a recent generalisation of Dung@?s abstract argumentation frameworks. This is done by associating with an ADF its characteristic one-step consequence ...

Comments

Information & Contributors

Information

Published In

cover image Guide Proceedings

IJCAI'15: Proceedings of the 24th International Conference on Artificial Intelligence

July 2015

4429 pages

ISBN:9781577357384

Editors:
Qiang Yang
Hong Kong University of Science and Technology
,
Michael Wooldridge
University of Oxford

Sponsors

The International Joint Conferences on Artificial Intelligence, Inc. (IJCAI)

Publisher

AAAI Press

Publication History

Published: 25 July 2015

Qualifiers

Article

Contributors

Other Metrics

View Article Metrics

Bibliometrics & Citations

Bibliometrics

Article Metrics

1
Total Citations
View Citations
0
Total Downloads

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

Reflects downloads up to 22 Sep 2024

Other Metrics

View Author Metrics

Citations

Cited By

Gaggl SRudolph SStraß H(2021)On the Decomposition of Abstract Dialectical Frameworks and the Complexity of Naive-based SemanticsJournal of Artificial Intelligence Research10.1613/jair.1.1134870(1-64)Online publication date: 4-Jan-2021
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1613/jair.1.11348

View Options

View options

Media

Figures

Other

Tables

View Table of Contents