Incremental Computation of Grounded Semantics for Dynamic Abstract Argumentation Frameworks

2017 ◽  
pp. 66-81 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sergio Greco ◽  
Francesco Parisi
Keyword(s):  
Abstract Argumentation ◽  
Incremental Computation ◽  
Grounded Semantics

scholarly journals Revisiting the Foundations of Abstract Argumentation – Semantics Based on Weak Admissibility and Weak Defense

2020 ◽  
Vol 34 (03) ◽  
pp. 2742-2749
Author(s):  
Ringo Baumann ◽  
Gerhard Brewka ◽  
Markus Ulbricht
Keyword(s):  
Classical Case ◽  
Research Area ◽  
Major Research ◽  
Abstract Argumentation ◽  
New Concepts ◽  
Key Concepts ◽  
Problematic Issue ◽  
Rigorous Study ◽  
Grounded Semantics ◽  
Special Case

In his seminal 1995 paper, Dung paved the way for abstract argumentation, a by now major research area in knowledge representation. He pointed out that there is a problematic issue with self-defeating arguments underlying all traditional semantics. A self-defeat occurs if an argument attacks itself either directly or indirectly via an odd attack loop, unless the loop is broken up by some argument attacking the loop from outside. Motivated by the fact that such arguments represent self-contradictory or paradoxical arguments, he asked for reasonable semantics which overcome the problem that such arguments may indeed invalidate any argument they attack. This paper tackles this problem from scratch. More precisely, instead of continuing to use previous concepts defined by Dung we provide new foundations for abstract argumentation, so-called weak admissibility and weak defense. After showing that these key concepts are compatible as in the classical case we introduce new versions of the classical Dung-style semantics including complete, preferred and grounded semantics. We provide a rigorous study of these new concepts including interrelationships as well as the relations to their Dung-style counterparts. The newly introduced semantics overcome the issue with self-defeating arguments, and they are semantically insensitive to syntactic deletions of self-attacking arguments, a special case of self-defeat.

scholarly journals Reasoning with Inconsistent Possibilistic Ontologies by Applying Argument Accrual

2017 ◽  
Vol 17 (02) ◽  
pp. e16
Author(s):  
Sergio Alejandro Gómez
Keyword(s):  
Logic Programming ◽  
Description Logic ◽  
Logic Programs ◽  
Argumentation Framework ◽  
Abstract Argumentation ◽  
Possibilistic Logic ◽  
Grounded Semantics

We present an approach for performing instance checking in possibilistic description logic programming ontologies by accruing arguments that support the membership of individuals to concepts. Ontologies are interpreted as possibilistic logic programs where accruals of arguments as regarded as vertexes in an abstract argumentation framework. A suitable attack relation between accruals is defined. We present a reasoning framework with a case study and a Java-based implementation for enacting the proposed approach that is capable of reasoning under Dung’s grounded semantics.

scholarly journals An experimental analysis on the similarity of argumentation semantics

2020 ◽  
Vol 11 (3) ◽  
pp. 269-304
Author(s):  
Federico Cerutti ◽  
Matthias Thimm ◽  
Mauro Vallati
Keyword(s):  
Approximation Algorithm ◽  
Experimental Analysis ◽  
Learning Phase ◽  
Decision Problems ◽  
Simple Approximation ◽  
Approximation Approach ◽  
Abstract Argumentation ◽  
Grounded Semantics ◽  
Theoretical Results

In this paper we ask whether approximation for abstract argumentation is useful in practice, and in particular whether reasoning with grounded semantics – which has polynomial runtime – is already an approximation approach sufficient for several practical purposes. While it is clear from theoretical results that reasoning with grounded semantics is different from, for example, skeptical reasoning with preferred semantics, we investigate how significant this difference is in actual argumentation frameworks. As it turns out, in many graphs models, reasoning with grounded semantics actually approximates reasoning with other semantics almost perfectly. An algorithm for grounded reasoning is thus a conceptually simple approximation algorithm that not only does not need a learning phase – like recent approaches – but also approximates well – in practice – several decision problems associated to other semantics.

scholarly journals If Nothing Is Accepted -- Repairing Argumentation Frameworks

2019 ◽  
Vol 66 ◽  
pp. 1099-1145
Author(s):  
Markus Ulbricht ◽  
Ringo Baumann
Keyword(s):  
Knowledge Representation ◽  
Knowledge Base ◽  
Search Space ◽  
Knowledge Representation And Reasoning ◽  
Hitting Set ◽  
Abstract Argumentation ◽  
Conflicting Information ◽  
All Solutions ◽  
First Results ◽  
Grounded Semantics

Conflicting information in an agent's knowledge base may lead to a semantical defect, that is, a situation where it is impossible to draw any plausible conclusion. Finding out the reasons for the observed inconsistency (so-called diagnoses) and/or restoring consistency in a certain minimal way (so-called repairs) are frequently occurring issues in knowledge representation and reasoning. In this article we provide a series of first results for these problems in the context of abstract argumentation theory regarding the two most important reasoning modes, namely credulous as well as sceptical acceptance. Our analysis includes the following problems regarding minimal repairs/diagnoses: existence, verification, computation of one and enumeration of all solutions. The latter problem is tackled with a version of the so-called hitting set duality first introduced by Raymond Reiter in 1987. It turns out that grounded semantics plays an outstanding role not only in terms of complexity, but also as a useful tool to reduce the search space for diagnoses regarding other semantics.

Bipolar Abstract Argumentation with Dual Attacks and Supports

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Nico Potyka
Keyword(s):  
Computational Complexity ◽  
Decision Problems ◽  
Abstract Argumentation ◽  
Stable Semantics ◽  
Support Relations ◽  
Support Relationships ◽  
Computational Properties ◽  
Inherent Tendency

Bipolar abstract argumentation frameworks allow modeling decision problems by defining pro and contra arguments and their relationships. In some popular bipolar frameworks, there is an inherent tendency to favor either attack or support relationships. However, for some applications, it seems sensible to treat attack and support equally. Roughly speaking, turning an attack edge into a support edge, should just invert its meaning. We look at a recently introduced bipolar argumentation semantics and two novel alternatives and discuss their semantical and computational properties. Interestingly, the two novel semantics correspond to stable semantics if no support relations are present and maintain the computational complexity of stable semantics in general bipolar frameworks.

scholarly journals Efficient EMD-based Similarity Search via Batch Pruning and Incremental Computation

2021 ◽  
pp. 1-1
Author(s):  
Yu Chen ◽  
Yong Zhang ◽  
Jin Wang ◽  
Jiacheng Wu ◽  
Chunxiao Xing
Keyword(s):  
Similarity Search ◽  
Incremental Computation

scholarly journals Incremental computation with names

2015 ◽  
Vol 50 (10) ◽  
pp. 748-766 ◽  
Author(s):  
Matthew A. Hammer ◽  
Joshua Dunfield ◽  
Kyle Headley ◽  
Nicholas Labich ◽  
Jeffrey S. Foster ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Incremental Computation

Complexity of fundamental problems in probabilistic abstract argumentation: Beyond independence

2019 ◽  
Vol 268 ◽  
pp. 1-29 ◽  
Author(s):  
Bettina Fazzinga ◽  
Sergio Flesca ◽  
Filippo Furfaro
Keyword(s):  
Abstract Argumentation

scholarly journals Towards fixed-parameter tractable algorithms for abstract argumentation

2012 ◽  
Vol 186 ◽  
pp. 1-37 ◽  
Author(s):  
Wolfgang Dvořák ◽  
Reinhard Pichler ◽  
Stefan Woltran
Keyword(s):  
Fixed Parameter Tractable ◽  
Abstract Argumentation ◽  
Fixed Parameter

Incremental Computation of Queries

2016 ◽  
pp. 1-4
Author(s):  
Guozhu Dong ◽  
Jianwen Su
Keyword(s):  
Incremental Computation
Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document