Related papers: On Strong and Weak Admissibility in Non-Flat Assum…
We extend the framework of abstract algebraic logic to weak logics, namely logical systems which are not necessarily closed under uniform substitution. We interpret weak logics by algebras expanded with an additional predicate and we…
In this work, we show that both logic programming and abstract argumentation frameworks can be interpreted in terms of Nelson's constructive logic N4. We do so by formalizing, in this logic, two principles that we call non-contradictory…
The study of arguments as abstract entities and their interaction as introduced by Dung (Artificial Intelligence 177, 1995) has become one of the most active research branches within Artificial Intelligence and Reasoning. A main issue for…
Powerful formalisms for abstract argumentation have been proposed, among them abstract dialectical frameworks (ADFs) that allow for a succinct and flexible specification of the relationship between arguments, and the GRAPPA framework which…
We revisit the notion of initial sets by Xu and Cayrol, i.e., non-empty minimal admissible sets in abstract argumentation frameworks. Initial sets are a simple concept for analysing conflicts in an abstract argumentation framework and to…
Abstract argumentation offers an appealing way of representing and evaluating arguments and counterarguments. This approach can be enhanced by a probability assignment to each argument. There are various interpretations that can be ascribed…
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…
Evaluating argument strength in quantitative argumentation systems has received increasing attention in the field of abstract argumentation. The concept of acceptability degree is widely adopted in gradual semantics, however, it may not be…
In formal argumentation, a distinction can be made between extension-based semantics, where sets of arguments are either (jointly) accepted or not, and ranking-based semantics, where grades of acceptability are assigned to arguments.…
In this paper we make a contribution to the unification of formal models of defeasible reasoning. We present several translations between formal argumentation frameworks and nonmonotonic logics for reasoning with plausible assumptions. More…
Propositional term modal logic is interpreted over Kripke structures with unboundedly many accessibility relations and hence the syntax admits variables indexing modalities and quantification over them. This logic is undecidable, and we…
The semantics as to which set of arguments in a given argumentation graph may be acceptable (acceptability semantics) can be characterised in a few different ways. Among them, labelling-based approach allows for concise and flexible…
Dung's abstract argumentation framework consists of a set of interacting arguments and a series of semantics for evaluating them. Those semantics partition the powerset of the set of arguments into two classes: extensions and…
Abstract argumentation has emerged as a method for non-monotonic reasoning that has gained popularity in the symbolic artificial intelligence community. In the literature, the different approaches to abstract argumentation that were refined…
In this paper, we address the problem of change in an abstract argumentation system. We focus on a particular change: the addition of a new argument which interacts with previous arguments. We study the impact of such an addition on the…
Translations between different nonmonotonic formalisms always have been an important topic in the field, in particular to understand the knowledge-representation capabilities those formalisms offer. We provide such an investigation in terms…
Answer Set Programming (ASP) is a popular framework for modeling combinatorial problems. However, ASP cannot easily be used for reasoning about uncertain information. Possibilistic ASP (PASP) is an extension of ASP that combines…
In this paper we introduce a novel family of semantics called weakly complete semantics. Differently from Dung's complete semantics, weakly complete semantics employs a mechanism called undecidedness blocking by which the label undecided of…
Recently there has been an increasing interest in frameworks extending Dung's abstract Argumentation Framework (AF). Popular extensions include bipolar AFs and AFs with recursive attacks and necessary supports. Although the relationships…
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…