An infinite-valued grounded labelling for abstract argumentation frameworks

This paper introduces a purely model-theoretic characterisation of a labelling-based semantics for argumentation frameworks. The meaning of such framework is determined declaratively by their unique minimum model (which is guaranteed to exist) or equivalently by a kind of immediate consequences operator. The distinctive aspect of our semantics is that it is settled on an infinite-valued approach. Indeed, we prove that it reduces to the grounded semantics when collapsed to a three-valued scenario.

[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]  Nicolas Maudet,et al.  Argumentation Ranking Semantics Based on Propagation , 2016, COMMA.

[3]  Pierpaolo Dondio.  Multi-Valued and Probabilistic Argumentation Frameworks , 2014, COMMA.

[4]  Leila Amgoud,et al.  Axiomatic Foundations of Acceptability Semantics , 2016, KR.

[5]  Dov M. Gabbay.  Equational approach to argumentation networks , 2012, Argument Comput..

[6]  Phan Minh Dung,et al.  An Argumentation-Theoretic Foundations for Logic Programming , 1995, J. Log. Program..

[7]  Sanjay Modgil,et al.  On the Graded Acceptability of Arguments , 2015, IJCAI.

[8]  Dov M. Gabbay,et al.  A Logical Account of Formal Argumentation , 2009, Stud Logica.

[9]  Dirk Vermeir,et al.  Robust Semantics for Argumentation Frameworks , 1999, J. Log. Comput..

[10]  Francesca Toni,et al.  Argumentation and answer set programming , 2011 .

[11]  William W. Wadge,et al.  Minimum model semantics for logic programs with negation-as-failure , 2003, TOCL.

[12]  Anthony Hunter,et al.  Probabilistic Reasoning with Abstract Argumentation Frameworks , 2017, J. Artif. Intell. Res..

[13]  Bart Verheij,et al.  Two Approaches to Dialectical Argumentation: Admissible Sets and Argumentation Stages , 1999 .

[14]  Pierpaolo Dondio.  Propagating degrees of truth on an argumentation framework: an abstract account of fuzzy argumentation , 2017, SAC.

[15]  Ulises Cortés,et al.  Preferred extensions as stable models , 2008, Theory Pract. Log. Program..

[16]  D. M. Gabbaya.  Equational approach to argumentation networks , 2012 .

[17]  Stefan Woltran,et al.  Making Use of Advances in Answer-Set Programming for Abstract Argumentation Systems , 2011, INAP/WLP.

[18]  Teodor C. Przymusinski.  The Well-Founded Semantics Coincides with the Three-Valued Stable Semantics , 1990, Fundam. Inform..

[19]  Srdjan Vesic,et al.  Measuring the Intensity of Attacks in Argumentation Graphs with Shapley Value , 2017, IJCAI.

[20]  Martin Caminada,et al.  On the Issue of Reinstatement in Argumentation , 2006, JELIA.

[21]  Srdjan Vesic,et al.  Acceptability Semantics for Weighted Argumentation Frameworks , 2017, IJCAI.

[22]  Pierpaolo Dondio.  Multi-valued Argumentation Frameworks , 2014, RuleML.

[23]  Nicolas Maudet,et al.  A Comparative Study of Ranking-Based Semantics for Abstract Argumentation , 2016, AAAI.

[24]  Gerard Vreeswijk.  An algorithm to compute minimally grounded and admissible defence sets in argument systems , 2006, COMMA.

[25]  Dov M. Gabbay,et al.  Complete Extensions in Argumentation Coincide with 3-Valued Stable Models in Logic Programming , 2009, Stud Logica.

[26]  Martin Caminada.  An Algorithm for Computing Semi-stable Semantics , 2007, ECSQARU.

[27]  Martin Caminada,et al.  On the equivalence between logic programming semantics and argumentation semantics , 2015, Int. J. Approx. Reason..