Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Block Argumentation

  • Conference paper
  • First Online:
PRIMA 2019: Principles and Practice of Multi-Agent Systems (PRIMA 2019)

Part of the book series: Lecture Notes in Computer Science ((LNAI,volume 11873))

Abstract

We advance the point of view: an argument as an argumentation and vice versa, to formulate Block (Bipolar) Argumentation (BBA), a bipolar argumentation theory that recursively instantiates an abstract argument with a bipolar argumentation. Multiple occurrence of the same argument(ation) can become issues in such a self-similar argumentation theory, for which we consider a graphical (syntactic) constraint, in relation to which we define its acceptability semantics. For some highlight, acceptability of unattacked arguments is not always warranted once this kind of a constraint must be taken into account.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 84.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 109.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Notes

  1. 1.

    “\(\textsf {and}\)” instead of “and” is used in this paper when the context in which it appears strongly indicates truth-value comparisons. It follows the semantics of classical logic conjunction. Similarly for “\(\textsf {or}\)” (disjunction).

  2. 2.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Assassination_of_Kim_Jong-nam.

References

  1. Arisaka, R., Bistarelli, S., Santini, F.: Block argumentation. CoRR abs/1901.06378 (2019). http://arxiv.org/abs/1901.06378

  2. Arisaka, R., Satoh, K.: Coalition formability semantics with conflict-eliminable sets of arguments. In: AAMAS, pp. 1469–1471 (2017)

    Google Scholar 

  3. Barringer, H., Gabbay, D.M.: Modal and temporal argumentation networks. Argum. Comput. 3(2–3), 203–227 (2012)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Caminada, M.: On the issue of reinstatement in argumentation. In: Fisher, M., van der Hoek, W., Konev, B., Lisitsa, A. (eds.) JELIA 2006. LNCS (LNAI), vol. 4160, pp. 111–123. Springer, Heidelberg (2006). https://doi.org/10.1007/11853886_11

    Chapter  MATH  Google Scholar 

  5. Cayrol, C., Lagasquie-Schiex, M.C.: Bipolarity in argumentation graphs: towards a better understanding. In: SUM, pp. 137–148 (2011)

    Google Scholar 

  6. Dung, P.M.: On the acceptability of arguments and its fundamental role in nonmonotonic reasoning, logic programming, and n-person games. Artif. Intell. 77(2), 321–357 (1995)

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  7. Gabbay, D.M.: Fibring argumentation frames. Stud. Logica 93(2–3), 231–295 (2009)

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  8. Gabbay, D.M.: Semantics for higher level attacks in extended argumentation frames part 1: overview. Stud. Logica 93(2–3), 357–381 (2009)

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgement

We thank anonymous reviewers for helpful comments. The last two authors have been supported by project “Rappresentazione della Conoscenza e Apprendimento Automatico (RACRA) (“Ricerca di base” 2018–2020).

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Nagoya Institute of Technology, Nagoya, Japan

    Ryuta Arisaka

  2. University of Perugia, Perugia, Italy

    Francesco Santini & Stefano Bistarelli

Authors
  1. Ryuta Arisaka
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Francesco Santini
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Stefano Bistarelli
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Ryuta Arisaka .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Università degli Studi di Torino, Turin, Italy

    Matteo Baldoni

  2. Utrecht University, Utrecht, The Netherlands

    Mehdi Dastani

  3. Zhejiang University, Hangzhou, China

    Beishui Liao

  4. National Institute of Advanced Industrial Science and Technology, Tokyo, Japan

    Yuko Sakurai

  5. University of Texas at Dallas, Richardson, TX, USA

    Rym Zalila Wenkstern

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2019 Springer Nature Switzerland AG

About this paper

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this paper

Arisaka, R., Santini, F., Bistarelli, S. (2019). Block Argumentation. In: Baldoni, M., Dastani, M., Liao, B., Sakurai, Y., Zalila Wenkstern, R. (eds) PRIMA 2019: Principles and Practice of Multi-Agent Systems. PRIMA 2019. Lecture Notes in Computer Science(), vol 11873. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-33792-6_48

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-33792-6_48

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-030-33791-9

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-030-33792-6

  • eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation