Interpretations and models for assumption-based argumentation

This work investigates an alternative characterization of semantics for Assumption-Based Argumentation (ABA) frameworks. The semantics of ABA frameworks are traditionally retrieved by the corresponding concepts of assumption extensions and assumption labellings, which only evaluate a subset of literals in the framework's language which are called assumptions. We argue about the interplay of non-assumptions in ABA frameworks and take inspiration from similarities between ABA and Logic Programming (LP) to propose new operations and semantic computation concerning ABA frameworks. To do so, we followed Przymusinski's work on Three-Valued Stable Models for LP to define interpretations and models for ABA frameworks (which also evaluate non-assumptions) and investigate whether this approach provides different results from the original. Amongst other results, we show that our complete model semantics is equivalent to the complete assumption labelling semantics for flat ABA frameworks, but the semi-stable model semantics is not equivalent to the semi-stable assumption labelling semantics.

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

[2]  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..

[3]  Martin Caminada,et al.  On the Difference between Assumytion-Based Argumentation and Abstract Argumentation , 2015, FLAP.

[4]  Robert Craven,et al.  Graph-Based Dispute Derivations in Assumption-Based Argumentation , 2013, TAFA.

[5]  Henry Prakken,et al.  A general account of argumentation with preferences , 2013, Artif. Intell..

[6]  Martin Caminada,et al.  On the Equivalence between Assumption-Based Argumentation and Logic Programming , 2017, J. Artif. Intell. Res..

[7]  Phan Minh Dung,et al.  Assumption-Based Argumentation , 2009, Argumentation in Artificial Intelligence.

[8]  Guillermo Ricardo Simari,et al.  Defeasible logic programming: an argumentative approach , 2003, Theory and Practice of Logic Programming.

[9]  Thomas Eiter,et al.  On the partial semantics for disjunctive deductive databases , 2004, Annals of Mathematics and Artificial Intelligence.

[10]  Floris Bex,et al.  Computational Models of Argument, Proceedings of COMMA , 2008, COMMA 2008.

[11]  Francesca Toni,et al.  Labellings for assumption-based and abstract argumentation , 2017, Int. J. Approx. Reason..

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

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

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

[15]  Francesca Toni,et al.  Complete Assumption Labellings , 2014, COMMA.

[16]  Francesca Toni,et al.  On Computing Explanations in Argumentation , 2015, AAAI.