Merging Argumentation Systems

The aim of this paper is to define an arbitration merging operator for argumentation frameworks. As it is known, an argumentation framework is a collection of defeasible proofs, called arguments, and a relation attack between these arguments. Many of such arguments can be put forward by different agents and represent their different points of view. The problem is how to merge these frameworks to obtain a unique framework reflecting the arguments of the group. We overcome it by resorting to a semantic approach that selects those arguments and their attacks of an agent that vary the least from the arguments and attacks of the other agents. Then, we proved our proposal satisfy some reasonable postulates and show a procedure to build an argumentation framework resulting from this arbitration merging operator.

[1]  Peter Z. Revesz On the semantics of theory change: arbitration between old and new information , 1993, PODS '93.

[2]  Marco Schaerf,et al.  Arbitration (or How to Merge Knowledge Bases) , 1998, IEEE Trans. Knowl. Data Eng..

[3]  Claudette Cayrol,et al.  Weighted Argumentation Systems: A Tool for Merging Argumentation Systems , 2011, 2011 IEEE 23rd International Conference on Tools with Artificial Intelligence.

[4]  Stefan Woltran,et al.  Merging Logic Programs under Answer Set Semantics , 2009, ICLP.

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

[6]  Gerard Vreeswijk,et al.  Abstract Argumentation Systems , 1997, Artif. Intell..

[7]  Sébastien Konieczny,et al.  Merging Argumentation Systems , 2005, AAAI.

[8]  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..

[9]  Trevor J. M. Bench-Capon,et al.  Argumentation Technology Applications of Computer Argumentation , 2007 .

[10]  John L. Pollock,et al.  How to Reason Defeasibly , 1992, Artif. Intell..

[11]  Sébastien Konieczny,et al.  Merging Information Under Constraints: A Logical Framework , 2002, J. Log. Comput..

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

[13]  Guillermo Ricardo Simari,et al.  Belief Revision and Argumentation Theory , 2009, Argumentation in Artificial Intelligence.

[14]  Guillermo Ricardo Simari,et al.  A Mathematical Treatment of Defeasible Reasoning and its Implementation , 1992, Artif. Intell..