Multi-sorted Argumentation

In the theory of abstract argumentation, the acceptance status of arguments is normally determined for the complete set of arguments at once, under a single semantics. However, this is not always desired. In this paper, we extend the notion of an argumentation framework to a multi-sorted argumentation framework, and we motivate this extension using an example which considers practical and epistemic arguments. In a multi-sorted argumentation framework, the arguments are partitioned into a number of cells, where each cell is associated with a semantics under which its arguments are evaluated. We prove the properties of the proposed framework, and we demonstrate our theory with a number of examples. Finally, we relate our theory to the theory of modal fibring of argumentation networks.

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

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

[3]  Trevor J. M. Bench-Capon Value-based argumentation frameworks , 2002, NMR.

[4]  Henry Prakken,et al.  Combining sceptical epistemic reasoning with credulous practical reasoning , 2006, COMMA.

[5]  Wolfgang Faber,et al.  Logic Programming and Nonmonotonic Reasoning , 2011, Lecture Notes in Computer Science.

[6]  Claudette Cayrol,et al.  On the Acceptability of Arguments in Preference-based Argumentation , 1998, UAI.

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

[8]  Frank Wolter,et al.  Semi-qualitative Reasoning about Distances: A Preliminary Report , 2000, JELIA.

[9]  Sanjay Modgil,et al.  Proof Theories and Algorithms for Abstract Argumentation Frameworks , 2009, Argumentation in Artificial Intelligence.

[10]  Dov M. Gabbay,et al.  Modal and Temporal Argumentation Networks , 2010, Essays in Memory of Amir Pnueli.

[11]  Henri Prade,et al.  Handling threats, rewards, and explanatory arguments in a unified setting: Research Articles , 2005 .

[12]  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..

[13]  Thomas Eiter,et al.  Argumentation Context Systems: A Framework for Abstract Group Argumentation , 2009, LPNMR.

[14]  Dov M. Gabbay,et al.  Fibring Argumentation Frames , 2009, Stud Logica.

[15]  Guillermo Ricardo Simari,et al.  Reasoning from Desires to Intentions: A Dialectical Framework , 2007, AAAI.

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

[17]  Henri Prade,et al.  Handling threats, rewards, and explanatory arguments in a unified setting , 2005, Int. J. Intell. Syst..

[18]  Zohar Manna,et al.  Time for Verification, Essays in Memory of Amir Pnueli , 2010, Essays in Memory of Amir Pnueli.