Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Incremental Computation of Deterministic Extensions for Dynamic Argumentation Frameworks

  • Conference paper
  • First Online:
Logics in Artificial Intelligence (JELIA 2016)

Part of the book series: Lecture Notes in Computer Science ((LNAI,volume 10021))

Included in the following conference series:

Abstract

We address the problem of efficiently recomputing the extensions of abstract argumentation frameworks (AFs) which are updated by adding/deleting arguments or attacks. In particular, after identifying some properties that hold for updates of AFs under several well-known semantics, we focus on the two most popular ‘deterministic’ semantics (namely, grounded and ideal) and present two algorithms for their incremental computation, well-suited to dynamic applications where updates to an initial AF are frequently performed to take into account new available knowledge. We experimentally validated the proposed approach.

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 39.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 54.99
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

References

  1. Amgoud, L., Vesic, S.: Revising option status in argument-based decision systems. J. Log. Comput. 22(5), 1019–1058 (2012)

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  2. Baroni, P., Boella, G., Cerutti, F., Giacomin, M., van der Torre, L.W.N., Villata, S.: On the input/output behavior of argumentation frameworks. Artif. Intell. 217, 144–197 (2014)

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  3. Baroni, P., Caminada, M., Giacomin, M.: An introduction to argumentation semantics. Knowl. Eng. Rev. 26(4), 365–410 (2011)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Baroni, P., Giacomin, M., Liao, B.: On topology-related properties of abstract argumentation semantics. a correction and extension to dynamics of argumentation systems: A division-based method. Artif. Intell. 212, 104–115 (2014)

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  5. Baumann, R.: Splitting an argumentation framework. In: Proceedings of International Conference on Logic Programming and Nonmonotonic Reasoning (LPNMR), pp. 40–53 (2011)

    Google Scholar 

  6. Baumann, R.: Normal and strong expansion equivalence for argumentation frameworks. Artif. Intell. 193, 18–44 (2012)

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  7. Baumann, R.: Context-free and context-sensitive kernels: update and deletion equivalence in abstract argumentation. In: Proceedings of ECAI, pp. 63–68 (2014)

    Google Scholar 

  8. Baumann, R., Brewka, G.: Expanding argumentation frameworks: enforcing and monotonicity results. In: Proceedings of COMMA, pp. 75–86 (2010)

    Google Scholar 

  9. Baumann, R., Brewka, G., Dvorák, W., Woltran, S.: Parameterized splitting: a simple modification-based approach. In: Correct Reasoning - Essays on Logic-Based AI in Honour of Vladimir Lifschitz, pp. 57–71 (2012)

    Google Scholar 

  10. Bench-Capon, T.J.M., Dunne, P.E.: Argumentation in artificial intelligence. Artif. Intell. 171(1015), 619–641 (2007)

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  11. Bisquert, P., Cayrol, C., de Saint-Cyr, F.D., Lagasquie-Schiex, M.: Characterizing change in abstract argumentation systems. Trends Belief Revision Argum. Dyn. 48, 75–102 (2013)

    MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  12. Boella, G., Kaci, S., van der Torre, L.W.N.: Dynamics in argumentation with single extensions: abstraction principles and the grounded extension. In: Proceedings of ECSQARU, pp. 107–118 (2009)

    Google Scholar 

  13. Boella, G., Kaci, S., van der Torre, L.W.N.: Dynamics in argumentation with single extensions: attack refinement and the grounded extension. In: Proceedings of ArgMAS, pp. 150–159 (2009)

    Google Scholar 

  14. Calautti, M., Greco, S., Trubitsyna, I.: Detecting decidable classes of finitely ground logic programs with function symbols. In: 15th International Symposium on Principles and Practice of Declarative Programming, PPDP 2013, Madrid, Spain, 16–18 September 2013, pp. 239–250 (2013)

    Google Scholar 

  15. Caminada, M.: Semi-stable semantics. In: Proceedings of COMMA, pp. 121–130 (2006)

    Google Scholar 

  16. Caminada, M., Sá, S., Alcântara, J., Dvorák, W.: On the equivalence between logic programming semantics and argumentation semantics. Int. J. Approx. Reason. 58, 87–111 (2015)

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  17. Cayrol, C., de Saint-Cyr, F.D., Lagasquie-Schiex, M.: Revision of an argumentation system. In: Proceedings of KR, pp. 124–134 (2008)

    Google Scholar 

  18. Cayrol, C., de Saint-Cyr, F.D., Lagasquie-Schiex, M.: Change in abstract argumentation frameworks: adding an argument. J. Artif. Intell. Res. 38, 49–84 (2010)

    MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  19. Charwat, G., Dvorák, W., Gaggl, S.A., Wallner, J.P., Woltran, S.: Methods for solving reasoning problems in abstract argumentation - a survey. Artif. Intell. 220, 28–63 (2015)

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  20. 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), 321–358 (1995)

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  21. Dung, P.M., Mancarella, P., Toni, F.: Computing ideal sceptical argumentation. Artif. Intell. 171(10–15), 642–674 (2007)

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  22. Dunne, P.E.: The computational complexity of ideal semantics. Artif. Intell. 173(18), 1559–1591 (2009)

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  23. Dunne, P.E., Bench-Capon, T.J.M.: Two party immediate response disputes: properties and efficiency. Artif. Intell. 149(2), 221–250 (2003)

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  24. Dunne, P.E., Wooldridge, M.: Complexity of abstract argumentation. In: Argumentation in Artificial Intelligence, pp. 85–104 (2009)

    Google Scholar 

  25. Dvorák, W., Pichler, R., Woltran, S.: Towards fixed-parameter tractable algorithms for argumentation. In: Proceedings of KR (2010)

    Google Scholar 

  26. Dvorák, W., Woltran, S.: Complexity of semi-stable and stage semantics in argumentation frameworks. Inf. Process. Lett. 110(11), 425–430 (2010)

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  27. Eiter, T., Strass, H., Truszczyński, M., Woltran, S. (eds.): Advances in Knowledge Representation, Logic Programming, and Abstract Argumentation. LNCS (LNAI), vol. 9060. Springer, Heidelberg (2015)

    Google Scholar 

  28. Falappa, M.A., Garcia, A.J., Kern-Isberner, G., Simari, G.R.: On the evolving relation between belief revision and argumentation. Knowl. Eng. Rev. 26(1), 35–43 (2011)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. Fazzinga, B., Flesca, S., Parisi, F.: Efficiently estimating the probability of extensions in abstract argumentation. In: Proceedings of SUM, pp. 106–119 (2013)

    Google Scholar 

  30. Fazzinga, B., Flesca, S., Parisi, F.: On the complexity of probabilistic abstract argumentation. In: Proceedings of IJCAI, pp. 898–904 (2013)

    Google Scholar 

  31. Fazzinga, B., Flesca, S., Parisi, F.: On the complexity of probabilistic abstract argumentation frameworks. ACM Trans. Comput. Log. 16(3), 22 (2015)

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  32. Fazzinga, B., Flesca, S., Parisi, F.: On efficiently estimating the probability of extensions in abstract argumentation frameworks. Int. J. Approx. Reason. 69, 106–132 (2016)

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  33. Fazzinga, B., Flesca, S., Parisi, F., Pietramala, A.: PARTY: a mobile system for efficiently assessing the probability of extensions in a debate. In: Proceedings of DEXA, pp. 220–235 (2015)

    Google Scholar 

  34. Greco, S., Molinaro, C., Trubitsyna, I.: Logic programming with function symbols: checking termination of bottom-up evaluation through program adornments. TPLP 13(4–5), 737–752 (2013)

    MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  35. Greco, S., Molinaro, C., Trubitsyna, I., Zumpano, E.: NP datalog: a logic language for expressing search and optimization problems. TPLP 10(2), 125–166 (2010)

    MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  36. Greco, S., Parisi, F.: Efficient computation of deterministic extensions for dynamic abstract argumentation frameworks. In: Proceedings of ECAI, pp. 1668–1669 (2016)

    Google Scholar 

  37. Liao, B.S., Jin, L., Koons, R.C.: Dynamics of argumentation systems: a division-based method. Artif. Intell. 175(11), 1790–1814 (2011)

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  38. Lifschitz, V., Turner, H.: Splitting a logic program. In: Proceedings of ICLP, pp. 23–37 (1994)

    Google Scholar 

  39. Modgil, S., Prakken, H.: Revisiting preferences and argumentation. In: Proceedings of IJCAI, pp. 1021–1026 (2011)

    Google Scholar 

  40. Oikarinen, E., Woltran, S.: Characterizing strong equivalence for argumentation frameworks. Artif. Intell. 175(14–15), 1985–2009 (2011)

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  41. Pollock, J.L.: Perceiving and reasoning about a changing world. Comput. Intell. 14(4), 498–562 (1998)

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  42. Rahwan, I., Simari, G.R.: Argumentation in Artificial Intelligence. Springer, New York (2009)

    Google Scholar 

  43. Thimm, M.: Tweety: a comprehensive collection of java libraries for logical aspects of artificial intelligence and knowledge representation. In: Proceedings of KR (2014)

    Google Scholar 

  44. Vreeswijk, G., Prakken, H.: Credulous and sceptical argument games for preferred semantics. In: Proceedings of JELIA, pp. 239–253 (2000)

    Google Scholar 

  45. Xu, Y., Cayrol, C.: The matrix approach for abstract argumentation frameworks. In: Proceedings of International TAFA Workshop, pp. 243–259 (2015)

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. DIMES Department, University of Calabria, Rende, Italy

    Sergio Greco & Francesco Parisi

Authors
  1. Sergio Greco
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Francesco Parisi
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Francesco Parisi .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Open University of Cyprus, Nicosia, Cyprus

    Loizos Michael

  2. University of Cyprus, Nicosia, Cyprus

    Antonis Kakas

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2016 Springer International Publishing AG

About this paper

Cite this paper

Greco, S., Parisi, F. (2016). Incremental Computation of Deterministic Extensions for Dynamic Argumentation Frameworks. In: Michael, L., Kakas, A. (eds) Logics in Artificial Intelligence. JELIA 2016. Lecture Notes in Computer Science(), vol 10021. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-48758-8_19

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-48758-8_19

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-319-48757-1

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-319-48758-8

  • eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation