Towards the Proof-theoretic Unification of Dung's Argumentation Framework: an Adaptive Logic Approach

The article presents a unifying adaptive logic framework for abstract argumentation. It consists of a core system for abstract argumentation and various adaptive logics based on it. These logics represent in an accurate sense all standard extensions defined within Dung’s abstract argumentation system with respect to sceptical and credulous acceptance. The models of our logics correspond exactly to specific extensions of given argument systems. Additionally, the dynamics of adaptive proofs mirror the argumentative reasoning of a rational agent. In particular, the presented logics allow for external dynamics, i.e. they are able to deal with the arrival of new arguments and are therefore apt to model open-ended argumentations by providing provisional conclusions.

[1]  Christian Straßer,et al.  Abstract argumentation and explanation applied to scientific debates , 2011, Synthese.

[2]  S. Modgil.  Reasoning About Preferences in Argumentation Frameworks TR-09-01 , 2009 .

[3]  Ana Gabriela Maguitman,et al.  Logical models of argument , 2000, CSUR.

[4]  Trevor J. M. Bench-Capon,et al.  Legal Case-based Reasoning as Practical Reasoning , 2005, Artificial Intelligence and Law.

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

[6]  Paolo Mancarella,et al.  Argumentation-Based Proof Procedures for Credulous and Sceptical Non-monotonic Reasoning , 2002, Computational Logic: Logic Programming and Beyond.

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

[8]  Diderik Batens,et al.  On the Transparency of Defeasible Logics: Equivalent Premise Sets, Equivalence of Their Extensions, and Maximality of the Lower Limit , 2009 .

[9]  Davide Grossi,et al.  Doing Argumentation Theory in Modal Logic , 2009 .

[10]  Diderik Batens,et al.  A Formal Logic for Abductive Reasoning , 2006, Log. J. IGPL.

[11]  Srdjan Vesic,et al.  On Revising Argumentation-Based Decision Systems , 2009, ECSQARU.

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

[13]  Diderik Batens,et al.  An Adaptive Characterization of Signed Systems for Paraconsistent Reasoning , 2006 .

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

[15]  Trevor J. M. Bench-Capon.  Persuasion in Practical Argument Using Value-based Argumentation Frameworks , 2003, J. Log. Comput..

[16]  Henry Prakken,et al.  Credulous and Sceptical Argument Games for Preferred Semantics , 2000, JELIA.

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

[18]  Dirk van Dalen,et al.  Logic and structure , 1980 .

[19]  Ch. Perelman,et al.  The New Rhetoric: A Treatise on Argumentation , 1971 .

[20]  Antonis C. Kakas,et al.  Computing Argumentation in Logic Programming , 1999, J. Log. Comput..

[21]  Ivan Bratko,et al.  Argument based machine learning , 2006, Artif. Intell..

[22]  Guido Boella,et al.  A Logic of Abstract Argumentation , 2005, ArgMAS.

[23]  D. Batens.  TOWARDS THE UNIFICATION OF INCONSISTENCY HANDLING MECHANISMS , 2004 .

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

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

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

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

[28]  Erik C. W. Krabbe,et al.  Dialogues, Logics and Other Strange Things , 2008 .

[29]  Patrick Brézillon,et al.  Lecture Notes in Artificial Intelligence , 1999 .

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

[31]  Phan Minh Dung,et al.  An Argumentation-Theoretic Foundations for Logic Programming , 1995, J. Log. Program..

[32]  Trevor J. M. Bench-Capon,et al.  Persuasion and Value in Legal Argument , 2005, J. Log. Comput..

[33]  Tran Cao Son,et al.  An Argumentation-theoretic Approach to Reasoning with Specificity , 1996, KR.

[34]  Diderik Batens,et al.  A Universal Logic Approach to Adaptive Logics , 2007, Logica Universalis.

[35]  Claudette Cayrol,et al.  On Decision Problems Related to the Preferred Semantics for Argumentation Frameworks , 2003, J. Log. Comput..

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

[37]  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..

[38]  Claudette Cayrol,et al.  Revision of an Argumentation System , 2008, KR.

[39]  Simon Parsons,et al.  A Generalization of Dung's Abstract Framework for Argumentation: Arguing with Sets of Attacking Arguments , 2006, ArgMAS.

[40]  Diderik Batens,et al.  Aspects of the Dynamics of Discussions and Logics Handling Them , 2001 .

[41]  Phan Minh Dung,et al.  On the Acceptability of Arguments and its Fundamental Role in Nonmonotonic Reasoning and Logic Programming , 1993, IJCAI.

[42]  Neophytos Demetriou.  Argumentation with Abduction , 2005 .

[43]  Trevor J. M. Bench-Capon,et al.  Audiences in argumentation frameworks , 2007, Artif. Intell..

[44]  Iyad Rahwan,et al.  Argumentation in Multi-Agent Systems , 2011, Lecture Notes in Computer Science.

[45]  Claudette Cayrol,et al.  A Reasoning Model Based on the Production of Acceptable Arguments , 2002, Annals of Mathematics and Artificial Intelligence.

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

[47]  L. Liverpool.  Two Party Immediate Response Disputes: Properties and Efficiency , 2001 .

[48]  Diderik Batens,et al.  Towards a Dialogic Interpretation of Dynamic Proofs , 2009 .