Related papers: Double Rectified Linear Unit-based Modular Semanti…
Abstract dialectical frameworks (ADFs) have been introduced as a formalism for modeling and evaluating argumentation allowing general logical satisfaction conditions. Different criteria used to settle the acceptance of arguments are called…
Assumption-Based Argumentation (ABA) is a well-established formalism for modelling and reasoning over debates, with a wide range of applications. However, the high computational complexity of core reasoning tasks in ABA poses a significant…
In the context of abstract argumentation, we present the benefits of considering temporality, i.e. the order in which arguments are enunciated, as well as causality. We propose a formal method to rewrite the concepts of acyclic abstract…
Abstract argumentation frameworks (AFs) are one of the most studied formalisms in AI. In this work, we introduce a certain subclass of AFs which we call compact. Given an extension-based semantics, the corresponding compact AFs are…
We study quantified propositional logics from the complexity theoretic point of view. First we introduce alternating dependency quantified boolean formulae (ADQBF) which generalize both quantified and dependency quantified boolean formulae.…
Counterfactual explanations are emerging as an attractive option for providing recourse to individuals adversely impacted by algorithmic decisions. As they are deployed in critical applications (e.g. law enforcement, financial lending), it…
In contrast to that a weak value of an observable is usually divided into real and imaginary parts, here we show that separation into modulus and argument is important for modular values. We first show that modular values are expressed by…
This paper proposed a framework based on quantum computing for reliability assessment of complex systems. The 'Quantum Twin' concept was also proposed. The framework can be used to accelerate the reliability assessment of large-scale…
Abstract argumentation is a popular toolkit for modeling, evaluating, and comparing arguments. Relationships between arguments are specified in argumentation frameworks (AFs), and conditions are placed on sets (extensions) of arguments that…
We present an experimental study of the effects of quantifier alternations on the evaluation of quantified Boolean formula (QBF) solvers. The number of quantifier alternations in a QBF in prenex conjunctive normal form (PCNF) is directly…
We introduce new semi-algebraic proof systems for Quantified Boolean Formulas (QBF) analogous to the propositional systems Nullstellensatz, Sherali-Adams and Sum-of-Squares. We transfer to this setting techniques both from the QBF…
Answer Set Programming with Quantifiers ASP(Q) extends Answer Set Programming (ASP) to allow for declarative and modular modeling of problems from the entire polynomial hierarchy. The first implementation of ASP(Q), called qasp, was based…
We present functions that quantify the contribution of a set of arguments in quantitative bipolar argumentation graphs to (the final strength of) an argument of interest, a so-called topic. Our set contribution functions are generalizations…
In this paper, we present and implement a multi-dimensional, modular framework for performing deep argument analysis (DeepA2) using current pre-trained language models (PTLMs). ArgumentAnalyst -- a T5 model (Raffel et al. 2020) set up and…
Argumentation frameworks, consisting of arguments and an attack relation representing conflicts, are fundamental for formally studying reasoning under conflicting information. We use methods from mathematical logic, specifically…
Abstract Dialectical Frameworks (ADFs) are argumentation frameworks where each node is associated with an acceptance condition. This allows us to model different types of dependencies as supports and attacks. Previous studies provided a…
Though preceding work in computational argument quality (AQ) mostly focuses on assessing overall AQ, researchers agree that writers would benefit from feedback targeting individual dimensions of argumentation theory. However, a large-scale…
In abstract argumentation theory, many argumentation semantics have been proposed for evaluating argumentation frameworks. This paper is based on the following research question: Which semantics corresponds well to what humans consider a…
Cycles of attacking arguments pose non-trivial issues in Dung style argumentation theory, apparent behavioural difference between odd and even length cycles being a notable one. While a few methods were proposed for treating them, to - in…
From an inconsistent database non-trivial arguments may be constructed both for a proposition, and for the contrary of that proposition. Therefore, inconsistency in a logical database causes uncertainty about which conclusions to accept.…