相关论文: Weakly Complete Semantics Based on Undecidedness B…

In this research note, we show the relationship between two non-admissible argumentation framework semantics: cogent and weakly admissible semantics. We prove that, while cogent extensions are weakly admissible, the converse is not true.

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…

Recently, Strength-based Argumentation Frameworks (StrAFs) have been proposed to model situations where some quantitative strength is associated with arguments. In this setting, the notion of accrual corresponds to sets of arguments that…

The Weak Completion Semantics (WCS) is a computational cognitive theory that has shown to be successful in modeling episodes of human reasoning. As the WCS is a recently developed logic programming approach, this paper investigates the…

Argumentation is one of the most popular approaches of defining a~non-monotonic formalism and several argumentation based semantics were proposed for defeasible logic programs. Recently, a new approach based on notions of conflict…

Much like admissibility is the key concept underlying preferred semantics, strong admissibility is the key concept underlying grounded semantics, as membership of a strongly admissible set is sufficient to show membership of the grounded…

Learning semantic segmentation models requires a huge amount of pixel-wise labeling. However, labeled data may only be available abundantly in a domain different from the desired target domain, which only has minimal or no annotations. In…

We address the issue of defining a semantics for deontic argumentation that supports weak permission. Some recent results show that grounded semantics do not support weak permission when there is a conflict between two obligations. We…

We observe some puzzling linguistic data concerning ordinary knowledge ascriptions that embed an epistemic (im)possibility claim. We conclude that it is untenable to jointly endorse both classical logic and a pair of intuitively attractive…

Semantic communication, enabled by deep joint source-channel coding (DeepJSCC), is widely expected to inherit the vulnerability of deep learning to adversarial perturbations. This paper challenges this prevailing belief and reveals a…

In this work, we broaden the investigation of admissibility notions in the context of assumption-based argumentation (ABA). More specifically, we study two prominent alternatives to the standard notion of admissibility from abstract…

We show that preferred, stable, complete, and grounded semantics satisfy attack removal monotonicity. This means that if an attack from b to a is removed, the status of a cannot worsen, e.g. if a was skeptically accepted, it cannot become…

We obtain, for the first time, a modular many-valued semantics for combined logics, which is built directly from many-valued semantics for the logics being combined, by means of suitable universal operations over partial non-deterministic…

Biomedical ontologies contain numerous concept or role names involving negative knowledge such as lacks_part, absence_of. Such a representation with labels rather than logical constructors would not allow a reasoner to interpret lacks_part…

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.…

We propose a novel ranking-based semantics for Dung-style argumentation frameworks with the help of conditional logics. Using an intuitive translation for an argumentation framework to generate conditionals, we can apply nonmonotonic…

The semantic web is an open and distributed environment in which it is hard to guarantee consistency of knowledge and information. Under the standard two-valued semantics everything is entailed if knowledge and information is inconsistent.…

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…

Abstract argumentation frameworks are formal systems that facilitate obtaining conclusions from non-monotonic knowledge systems. Within such a system, an argumentation semantics is defined as a set of arguments with some desired qualities,…

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…