Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Generalizing Naive and Stable Semantics in Argumentation Frameworks with Necessities and Preferences

  • Conference paper
Scalable Uncertainty Management (SUM 2012)

Part of the book series: Lecture Notes in Computer Science ((LNAI,volume 7520))

Included in the following conference series:

Abstract

In [4] [5], the classical acceptability semantics are generalized by preferences. The extensions under a given semantics correspond to maximal elements of a relation encoding this semantics and defined on subsets of arguments. Furthermore, a set of postulates is proposed to provide a full characterization of any relation encoding the generalized stable semantics. In this paper, we adapt this approach to preference-based argumentation frameworks with necessities. We propose a full characterization of stable and naive semantics in this new context by new sets of adapted postulates and we present a practical method to compute them by using a classical Dung argumentation framework.

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 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

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Amgoud, L., Cayrol, C.: A reasoning model based on the production of acceptable arguments. Ann. Math. Artif. Intell. 34, 197–216 (2002)

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  2. Amgoud, L., Besnard, P.: Bridging the Gap between Abstract Argumentation Systems and Logic. In: Godo, L., Pugliese, A. (eds.) SUM 2009. LNCS, vol. 5785, pp. 12–27. Springer, Heidelberg (2009)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  3. Amgoud, L., Vesic, S.: Repairing preference-based argumentation systems. In: Proceedings of IJCAI 2009, pp. 665–670 (2009)

    Google Scholar 

  4. Amgoud, L., Vesic, S.: Generalizing stable semantics by preferences. In: Proceedings of COMMA 2010, pp. 39–50 (2010)

    Google Scholar 

  5. Amgoud, L., Vesic, S.: A new approach for preference-based argumentation frameworks. Ann. Math. Artif. Intell. 63(2), 149–183 (2011)

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  6. Bench-Capon, T.J.M.: Persuasion in practical argument using value based argumentation frameworks. J. of Log. and Comp. 13(3), 429–448 (2003)

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  7. Besnard, P., Hunter, A.: Elements of Argumentation. The MIT Press (2008)

    Google Scholar 

  8. Boella, G., Gabbay, D.M., Van Der Torre, L., Villata, S.: Support in Abstract Argumentation. In: Proceedings of COMMA 2010, pp. 40–51 (2010)

    Google Scholar 

  9. Brewka, G., Woltran, S.: Abstract Dialectical Frameworks. In: Proceedings of KR 2010, pp. 102–111 (2010)

    Google Scholar 

  10. Cayrol, C., Lagasquie-Schiex, M.C.: On the Acceptability of Arguments in Bipolar Argumentation Frameworks. In: Godo, L. (ed.) ECSQARU 2005. LNCS (LNAI), vol. 3571, pp. 378–389. Springer, Heidelberg (2005)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  11. Cayrol, C., Lagasquie-Schiex, M.C.: Coalitions of arguments: A tool for handling bipolar argumentation frameworks. Int. J. Intell. Syst. 25(1), 83–109 (2010)

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

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

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  13. Gebser, M., Gharib, M., Mercer, R., Schaub, T.: Monotonic Answer Set Programming. J. of Log. and Comp. 19(4), 539–564 (2009)

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  14. Gorogiannis, N., Hunter, A.: Instantiating abstract, argumentation with classical logic arguments: Postulates and properties. Artif. Intel. 175, 1479–1497 (2011)

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  15. Łukaszewicz, W.: Considerations on Default Logic: An Alternative Approach. Comput. Intel. 4, 1–16 (1988)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Modgil, S.: Reasoning about preferences in argumentation frameworks. Artif. Intel. 173, 901–934 (2009)

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  17. Nouioua, F., Risch, V.: Argumentation Frameworks with Necessities. In: Benferhat, S., Grant, J. (eds.) SUM 2011. LNCS, vol. 6929, pp. 163–176. Springer, Heidelberg (2011)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  18. Nouioua, F., Risch, V.: A Reconstruction of Abstract Argumentation Admissible Semantics into Defaults and Answer Sets Programming. In: Proceedings of ICAART 2012, pp. 237–242 (2012)

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. LSIS, Aix-Marseille Univ, Avenue Escadrille Normandie Niemen, 13997, Marseille Cedex 20, France

    Farid Nouioua

Authors
  1. Farid Nouioua
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Mathematics and Computer Science, Marburg University, Hans-Meerwein-Strasse 6, 35032, Marburg, Germany

    Eyke Hüllermeier , Thomas Fober  & Bernhard Seeger ,  & 

  2. Department of Computer Science, Auckland University, 38 Princes St., 1010, Auckland, New Zealand

    Sebastian Link

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2012 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg

About this paper

Cite this paper

Nouioua, F. (2012). Generalizing Naive and Stable Semantics in Argumentation Frameworks with Necessities and Preferences. In: Hüllermeier, E., Link, S., Fober, T., Seeger, B. (eds) Scalable Uncertainty Management. SUM 2012. Lecture Notes in Computer Science(), vol 7520. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-33362-0_4

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-33362-0_4

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-642-33361-3

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-642-33362-0

  • eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation