Resolutions in Structured Argumentation

Recently resolution of attacks has been studied in the context of abstract argumentation frameworks. In this paper it is claimed that resolutions should be studied under the assumption that they are generated through the acquisition of preference information, and that this implies that the existing study of resolutions has limited applicability. A formalisation of preference-based resolutions is defined in the context of the ASPIC+ framework for structured argumentation, and several properties of resolutions are proven or disproven. It is also argued that when resolutions are modelled without specifying the structure of arguments, then it is easy to overlook that assumptions made at the abstract level do not hold for all reasonable instantiations of the abstract framework, thus reducing its significance.

[1]  Sanjay Modgil,et al.  Hierarchical Argumentation , 2006, JELIA.

[2]  Pietro Baroni,et al.  On principle-based evaluation of extension-based argumentation semantics , 2007, Artif. Intell..

[3]  Gerhard Brewka,et al.  Preferred Subtheories: An Extended Logical Framework for Default Reasoning , 1989, IJCAI.

[4]  Henry Prakken,et al.  The Carneades model of argument and burden of proof , 2007, Artif. Intell..

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

[6]  Pietro Baroni,et al.  On the resolution-based family of abstract argumentation semantics and its grounded instance , 2011, Artif. Intell..

[7]  Alexander Artikis,et al.  Logic Programs, Norms and Action , 2012, Lecture Notes in Computer Science.

[8]  Martin Caminada,et al.  On the evaluation of argumentation formalisms , 2007, Artif. Intell..

[9]  Henry Prakken,et al.  Revisiting Preferences and Argumentation , 2011, IJCAI.

[10]  Henry Prakken,et al.  Relating Carneades with Abstract Argumentation , 2011, IJCAI.

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

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

[14]  Henry Prakken,et al.  An abstract framework for argumentation with structured arguments , 2010, Argument Comput..

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

[16]  Anthony Hunter,et al.  Instantiating abstract argumentation with classical logic arguments: Postulates and properties , 2011, Artif. Intell..

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

[18]  Henry Prakken,et al.  Some Reflections on Two Current Trends in Formal Argumentation , 2012, Logic Programs, Norms and Action.

[19]  Philippe Besnard,et al.  A Formal Analysis of Logic-Based Argumentation Systems , 2010, SUM.

[20]  Henry Prakken,et al.  A general account of argumentation with preferences , 2013, Artif. Intell..