An algorithm to compute minimally grounded and admissible defence sets in argument systems

This paper presents a query-answering algorithm to compute minimal lines of defence around an individual argument. The algorithm returns all such defence sets together with an indication whether the defence is grounded or admissible. For every argument encountered in the search process the algorithm further indicates whether that argument is IN, OUT, or UNDEC (undecided) according to the grounded semantics. The presentation of the algorithm is followed by a correctness proof and a complexity analysis of other than worst cases. The algorithm is already functional in argument analysis and visualization tools.

[1]  Peter C. Cheeseman,et al.  Where the Really Hard Problems Are , 1991, IJCAI.

[2]  Dirk Vermeir,et al.  Dialectic semantics for argumentation frameworks , 1999, ICAIL '99.

[3]  Phan Minh Dung,et al.  Dialectic proof procedures for assumption-based, admissible argumentation , 2006, Artif. Intell..

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

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

[6]  Hector J. Levesque,et al.  Generating Hard Satisfiability Problems , 1996, Artif. Intell..

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

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

[9]  Trevor J. M. Bench-Capon,et al.  Two party immediate response disputes: Properties and efficiency , 2003, Artif. Intell..

[10]  Chris Reed,et al.  Araucaria: Software for Argument Analysis, Diagramming and Representation , 2004, Int. J. Artif. Intell. Tools.

[11]  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..

[12]  Sylvie Doutre,et al.  On sceptical vs credulous acceptance for abstract argument systems , 2004, NMR.

[13]  Yannis Dimopoulos,et al.  Graph theoretical structures in logic programs and default theories , 1996 .

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

[15]  Bart Verheij,et al.  Artificial argument assistants for defeasible argumentation , 2003, Artif. Intell..

[16]  Y. Shoham,et al.  Empirical approach to the complexity of hard problems , 2005 .

[17]  Trevor J. M. Bench-Capon,et al.  Coherence in finite argument systems , 2002, Artif. Intell..