Related papers: Bipolar in Temporal Argumentation Framework
Realizability for knowledge representation formalisms studies the following question: given a semantics and a set of interpretations, is there a knowledge base whose semantics coincides exactly with the given interpretation set? We…
In artificial intelligence, multi agent systems constitute an interesting typology of society modeling, and have in this regard vast fields of application, which extend to the human sciences. Logic is often used to model such kind of…
We present an overview on Temporal Logic Programming under the perspective of its application for Knowledge Representation and declarative problem solving. Such programs are the result of combining usual rules with temporal modal operators,…
Explaining the strength of arguments under gradual semantics is receiving increasing attention. For example, various studies in the literature offer explanations by computing the attribution scores of arguments or edges in Quantitative…
Mathematical optimization offers highly-effective tools for finding solutions for problems with well-defined goals, notably scheduling. However, optimization solvers are often unexplainable black boxes whose solutions are inaccessible to…
The issue of representing attacks to attacks in argumentation is receiving an increasing attention as a useful conceptual modelling tool in several contexts. In this paper we present AFRA, a formalism encompassing unlimited recursive…
Generalizing the attack structure in argumentation frameworks (AFs) has been studied in different ways. Most prominently, the binary attack relation of Dung frameworks has been extended to the notion of collective attacks. The resulting…
Argumentation theory is a powerful paradigm that formalizes a type of commonsense reasoning that aims to simulate the human ability to resolve a specific problem in an intelligent manner. A classical argumentation process takes into account…
Recent works reveal that adversarial augmentation benefits the generalization of neural networks (NNs) if used in an appropriate manner. In this paper, we introduce Temporal Adversarial Augmentation (TA), a novel video augmentation…
Abstract argumentation frameworks (AFs) provide a formal setting to analyze many forms of reasoning with conflicting information. While the expressiveness of general infinite AFs make them a tempting tool for modeling many kinds of…
Reasoning about time is of fundamental importance. Many facts are time-dependent. For example, athletes change teams from time to time, and different government officials are elected periodically. Previous time-dependent question answering…
In this note we consider the problem of introducing variables in temporal logic programs under the formalism of "Temporal Equilibrium Logic" (TEL), an extension of Answer Set Programming (ASP) for dealing with linear-time modal operators.…
Dung's abstract argumentation theory is a widely used formalism to model conflicting information and to draw conclusions in such situations. Hereby, the knowledge is represented by so-called argumentation frameworks (AFs) and the reasoning…
Argumentation Frameworks (AFs) are a key formalism in AI research. Their semantics have been investigated in terms of principles, which define characteristic properties in order to deliver guidance for analysing established and developing…
An extension of an abstract argumentation framework, called collective argumentation, is introduced in which the attack relation is defined directly among sets of arguments. The extension turns out to be suitable, in particular, for…
In multi-agent system design, a crucial aspect is to ensure robustness, meaning that for a coalition of agents A, small violations of adversarial assumptions only lead to small violations of A's goals. In this paper we introduce a logical…
Workflows constitute an important language to represent knowledge about processes, but also increasingly to reason on such knowledge. On the other hand, there is a limit to which time constraints between activities can be expressed.…
The combination of argumentation and probability paves the way to new accounts of qualitative and quantitative uncertainty, thereby offering new theoretical and applicative opportunities. Due to a variety of interests, probabilistic…
Dung's abstract argumentation frameworks model acceptability solely in terms of an attack relation, thereby conflating two conceptually distinct aspects of argumentative reasoning: direct conflict between arguments and the structural…
Labelling-based formal argumentation relies on labelling functions that typically assign one of 3 labels to indicate either acceptance, rejection, or else undecided-to-be-either, to each argument. While a classical labelling-based approach…