Epistemic Argumentation Framework: Theory and Computation

The paper introduces the notion of an epistemic argumentation framework (EAF) as a means to integrate the beliefs of a reasoner with argumentation. Intuitively, an EAF encodes the beliefs of an agent who reasons about arguments. Formally, an EAF is a pair of an argumentation framework and an epistemic constraint. The semantics of the EAF is defined by the notion of an ω-epistemic labelling set, where ω is complete, stable, grounded, or preferred, which is a set of ω-labellings that collectively satisfies the epistemic constraint of the EAF. The paper shows how EAF can represent different views of reasoners on the same argumentation framework. It also includes representing preferences in EAF and multi-agent argumentation. Finally, the paper discusses complexity issues and computation using epistemic logic programming.

[1]  Tran Cao Son,et al.  On Computing World Views of Epistemic Logic Programs , 2017, IJCAI.

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

[3]  Vladimir Lifschitz,et al.  Nested expressions in logic programs , 1999, Annals of Mathematics and Artificial Intelligence.

[4]  Wolfgang Dvorák,et al.  Computational Problems in Formal Argumentation and their Complexity , 2017, FLAP.

[5]  Srdjan Vesic,et al.  A new approach for preference-based argumentation frameworks , 2011, Annals of Mathematics and Artificial Intelligence.

[6]  Serena Villata,et al.  Meta-Argumentation Modelling I: Methodology and Techniques , 2009, Stud Logica.

[7]  Chiaki Sakama,et al.  Representing Argumentation Frameworks in Answer Set Programming , 2017, Fundam. Informaticae.

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

[9]  Claudette Cayrol,et al.  Bipolar abstract argumentation systems , 2009, Argumentation in Artificial Intelligence.

[10]  Thomas Eiter,et al.  Evaluating epistemic negation in answer set programming , 2016, Artif. Intell..

[11]  François Schwarzentruber,et al.  Building an Epistemic Logic for Argumentation , 2012, JELIA.

[12]  Gabriella Pigozzi,et al.  On judgment aggregation in abstract argumentation , 2009, Autonomous Agents and Multi-Agent Systems.

[13]  Ringo Baumann,et al.  Expanding Argumentation Frameworks: Enforcing and Monotonicity Results , 2010, COMMA.

[14]  Wietske Visser,et al.  Argumentation-Based Qualitative Preference Modelling with Incomplete and Uncertain Information , 2011 .

[15]  Chiaki Sakama,et al.  Epistemic Argumentation Framework , 2019, PRICAI.

[16]  Nicolas Maudet,et al.  Rationalisation of Profiles of Abstract Argumentation Frameworks: Characterisation and Complexity , 2017, J. Artif. Intell. Res..

[17]  Pierre Marquis,et al.  Constrained Argumentation Frameworks , 2006, KR.

[18]  Miroslaw Truszczynski,et al.  Answer set programming at a glance , 2011, Commun. ACM.

[19]  Leon van der Torre,et al.  Preference-based argumentation: Arguments supporting multiple values , 2008, Int. J. Approx. Reason..

[20]  Toshiko Wakaki,et al.  Preference-based argumentation built from prioritized logic programming , 2015, J. Log. Comput..

[21]  Pavlos Moraitis,et al.  Theoretical and Computational Properties of Preference-based Argumentation , 2008, ECAI.

[22]  Maite López-Sánchez,et al.  A Multi-agent Argumentation Framework to Support Collective Reasoning , 2016, COREDEMA@ECAI.

[23]  Michael Gelfond,et al.  Strong Introspection , 1991, AAAI.

[24]  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..

[25]  Tran Cao Son,et al.  A parallel memory-efficient epistemic logic program solver: harder, better, faster , 2019, Annals of Mathematics and Artificial Intelligence.

[26]  Leon van der Torre,et al.  A Dynamic Approach for Combining Abstract Argumentation Semantics , 2018, CLAR.

[27]  Nico Potyka,et al.  Updating Belief in Arguments in Epistemic Graphs , 2018, KR.

[28]  Iyad Rahwan,et al.  Collective argument evaluation as judgement aggregation , 2010, AAMAS.

[29]  Anthony Hunter,et al.  A probabilistic approach to modelling uncertain logical arguments , 2013, Int. J. Approx. Reason..

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

[31]  Pavlos Moraitis,et al.  Control Argumentation Frameworks , 2018, AAAI.

[32]  Iyad Rahwan,et al.  Judgment Aggregation in Multi-Agent Argumentation , 2014, J. Log. Comput..

[33]  Hannes Strass,et al.  Abstract Dialectical Frameworks Revisited , 2013, IJCAI.

[34]  Henry Prakken,et al.  Argument-Based Extended Logic Programming with Defeasible Priorities , 1997, J. Appl. Non Class. Logics.

[35]  Wolfgang Dvorák.  On the Complexity of Computing the Justification Status of an Argument , 2011, TAFA.

[36]  Weiwei Chen,et al.  Aggregating Alternative Extensions of Abstract Argumentation Frameworks: Preservation Results for Quota Rules , 2018, COMMA.

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

[38]  Michael Gelfond,et al.  Classical negation in logic programs and disjunctive databases , 1991, New Generation Computing.

[39]  Anthony Hunter,et al.  Epistemic Attack Semantics , 2018, COMMA.

[40]  Antonis C. Kakas,et al.  GORGIAS: Applying argumentation , 2018, Argument Comput..

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

[42]  Stefan Woltran,et al.  Abstract Dialectical Frameworks , 2010, KR.