Revision of an Argumentation System

In this paper, we address the problem of revising a Dung-style abstract argumentation system, when we add a new argument which interacts with one previous argument. We study the impact of such an addition on the outcome of the argumentation system, more particularly on the set of its extensions. Different kinds of revision are defined according to the change induced on the number or on the contents of the extensions. Two particular revisions are studied, for which we propose characterization theorems.

[1]  Phan Minh Dung,et al.  On the Acceptability of Arguments and its Fundamental Role in Nonmonotonic Reasoning, Logic Programming and n-Person Games , 1995, Artif. Intell..

[2]  Renata Wassermann,et al.  Full Acceptance through Argumentation -a Preliminary Report , 1999 .

[3]  Anthony Hunter.  Making Argumentation More Believable , 2004, AAAI.

[4]  Antonis C. Kakas,et al.  Argumentation based decision making for autonomous agents , 2003, AAMAS '03.

[5]  Paul E. Dunne,et al.  Semi-stable semantics , 2006, J. Log. Comput..

[6]  Trevor J. M. Bench-Capon.  Specification and Implementation of Toulmin Dialogue Game , 1999 .

[7]  Marianne Winslett,et al.  Reasoning about Action Using a Possible Models Approach , 1988, AAAI.

[8]  Ana Gabriela Maguitman,et al.  Logical models of argument , 2000, CSUR.

[9]  Phan Minh Dung,et al.  An Abstract, Argumentation-Theoretic Approach to Default Reasoning , 1997, Artif. Intell..

[10]  Cees Witteveen,et al.  A General Framework for Revising Non-Monotonic Theories , 1997, LPNMR.

[11]  Henry Prakken,et al.  Logics for Defeasible Argumentation , 2001 .

[12]  Trevor J. M. Bench-Capon,et al.  Complexity and Combinatorial Properties of Argument Systems , 2001 .

[13]  Guillermo Ricardo Simari,et al.  Argument Theory Change: Revision Upon Warrant , 2008, COMMA.

[14]  Sébastien Konieczny,et al.  On the merging of Dung's argumentation systems , 2007, Artif. Intell..

[15]  Peter Gärdenfors,et al.  On the logic of theory change: Partial meet contraction and revision functions , 1985, Journal of Symbolic Logic.

[16]  Trevor J. M. Bench-Capon,et al.  Coherence in finite argument systems , 2002, Artif. Intell..

[17]  Henry Prakken,et al.  Heuristics in Argumentation: A Game-Theoretical Investigation , 2008, COMMA 2008.

[18]  Pietro Baroni,et al.  SCC-recursiveness: a general schema for argumentation semantics , 2005, Artif. Intell..

[19]  John L. Pollock,et al.  Belief Revision And Epistemology , 2000, Synthese.

[20]  Pierre Marquis,et al.  Prudent semantics for argumentation frameworks , 2005, 17th IEEE International Conference on Tools with Artificial Intelligence (ICTAI'05).

[21]  Guillermo Ricardo Simari,et al.  Belief dynamics and defeasible argumentation in rational agents , 2004, NMR.

[22]  Nicolas Maudet,et al.  Strategical considerations for argumentative agents (preliminary report) , 2002, Non-Monotonic Reasoning.

[23]  Simon Parsons,et al.  Modelling dialogues using argumentation , 2000, Proceedings Fourth International Conference on MultiAgent Systems.

[24]  Paolo Mancarella,et al.  A dialectic procedure for sceptical, assumption-based argumentation , 2006, COMMA.

[25]  Cristiano Castelfranchi,et al.  Revising Beliefs Through Arguments: Bridging the Gap Between Argumentation and Belief Revision in MAS , 2004, ArgMAS.

[26]  Claudette Cayrol,et al.  Inferring from Inconsistency in Preference-Based Argumentation Frameworks , 2002, Journal of Automated Reasoning.

[27]  Léa Sombé,et al.  A glance at revision and updating in knowledge bases , 1994, Int. J. Intell. Syst..