Algorithms for Argumentation Semantics: Labeling Attacks as a Generalization of Labeling Arguments

A Dung argumentation framework (AF) is a pair (A,R): A is a set of abstract arguments and R ⊆ A×A is a binary relation, so-called the attack relation, for capturing the conflicting arguments. "Labeling" based algorithms for enumerating extensions (i.e. sets of acceptable arguments) have been set out such that arguments (i.e. elements of A) are the only subject for labeling. In this paper we present implemented algorithms for listing extensions by labeling attacks (i.e. elements of R) along with arguments. Specifically, these algorithms are concerned with enumerating all extensions of an AF under a number of argumentation semantics: preferred, stable, complete, semi stable, stage, ideal and grounded. Our algorithms have impact, in particular, on enumerating extensions of AF-extended models that allow attacks on attacks. To demonstrate this impact, we instantiate our algorithms for an example of such models: namely argumentation frameworks with recursive attacks (AFRA), thereby we end up with unified algorithms that enumerate extensions of any AF/AFRA.

[1]  Dov M. Gabbay,et al.  Temporal Dynamics of Argumentation Networks , 2005 .

[2]  Katie Atkinson,et al.  Algorithms for decision problems in argument systems under preferred semantics , 2014, Artif. Intell..

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

[4]  Ur Informationssysteme,et al.  Answer-Set Programming Encodings for Argumentation Frameworks , 2008 .

[5]  Paolo Mancarella,et al.  Computing ideal sceptical argumentation , 2007, Artif. Intell..

[6]  Serena Villata,et al.  Attack Semantics for Abstract Argumentation , 2011, IJCAI.

[7]  Stefan Woltran,et al.  Implementing Abstract Argumentation - A Survey , 2013 .

[8]  Dov M. Gabbay,et al.  Temporal Dynamics of Support and Attack Networks: From Argumentation to Zoology , 2005, Mechanizing Mathematical Reasoning.

[9]  Massimiliano Giacomin,et al.  Computing Preferred Extensions in Abstract Argumentation: A SAT-Based Approach , 2013, TAFA.

[10]  Christos H. Papadimitriou,et al.  On kernels, defaults and even graphs , 2004, Annals of Mathematics and Artificial Intelligence.

[11]  Pietro Baroni,et al.  An introduction to argumentation semantics , 2011, The Knowledge Engineering Review.

[12]  Philippe Besnard,et al.  Checking the acceptability of a set of arguments , 2004, NMR.

[13]  Pietro Baroni,et al.  AFRA: Argumentation framework with recursive attacks , 2011, Int. J. Approx. Reason..

[14]  Stefan Woltran,et al.  Complexity-sensitive decision procedures for abstract argumentation , 2012, Artif. Intell..

[15]  Sanjay Modgil,et al.  Reasoning about preferences in argumentation frameworks , 2009, Artif. Intell..

[16]  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..

[17]  Anthony Hunter,et al.  Elements of Argumentation , 2007, ECSQARU.

[18]  Dov M. Gabbay.  Semantics for Higher Level Attacks in Extended Argumentation Frames Part 1: Overview , 2009, Stud Logica.

[19]  Trevor J. M. Bench-Capon,et al.  Argumentation in artificial intelligence , 2007, Artif. Intell..

[20]  Leila Amgoud,et al.  Argumentation frameworks as constraint satisfaction problems , 2011, Annals of Mathematics and Artificial Intelligence.

[21]  Pierpaolo Dondio.  Computing the Grounded Semantics in all the Subgraphs of an Argumentation Framework: An Empirical Evaluation , 2013, CLIMA.

[22]  Ringo Baumann,et al.  Splitting Argumentation Frameworks: An Empirical Evaluation , 2011, TAFA.

[23]  Guillermo Ricardo Simari,et al.  The Added Value of Argumentation , 2013 .

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

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

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

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

[28]  Bernhard Nebel,et al.  Finding Admissible and Preferred Arguments Can be Very Hard , 2000, KR.

[29]  M. Giacomin,et al.  A SAT-based Approach for Computing Extensions in Abstract Argumentation , 2013 .

[30]  Paul E. Dunne,et al.  The computational complexity of ideal semantics , 2009, Artif. Intell..

[31]  Ur Informationssysteme,et al.  Towards Fixed-Parameter Tractable Algorithms for Abstract Argumentation , 2011 .

[32]  Sylvie Doutre,et al.  Preferred Extensions of Argumentation Frameworks: Query Answering and Computation , 2001, IJCAR.

[33]  Martin Caminada,et al.  An Algorithm for Stage Semantics , 2010, COMMA.

[34]  Paul E. Dunne,et al.  Computational properties of argument systems satisfying graph-theoretic constraints , 2007, Artif. Intell..

[35]  Nir Oren,et al.  Probabilistic Argumentation Frameworks , 2011, TAFA.

[36]  Jianhua Dai,et al.  Computing Preferred Labellings by Exploiting SCCs and Most Sceptically Rejected Arguments , 2013, TAFA.

[37]  Stefan Szeider,et al.  Augmenting Tractable Fragments of Abstract Argumentation , 2011, IJCAI.

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