Reasoning about preferences in argumentation frameworks

The abstract nature of Dung's seminal theory of argumentation accounts for its widespread application as a general framework for various species of non-monotonic reasoning, and, more generally, reasoning in the presence of conflict. A Dung argumentation framework is instantiated by arguments an...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:Artificial intelligence Vol. 173; no. 9; pp. 901 - 934
Main Author: Modgil, Sanjay
Format: Journal Article
Language:English
Published: Oxford Elsevier B.V 01.06.2009
Elsevier
Subjects:
Applied sciences
Argumentation
Artificial intelligence
Computer science; control theory; systems
Dung
Exact sciences and technology
Learning and adaptive systems
Logic programming
Non-monotonic reasoning
Preferences
Software
Software engineering
Dung
Argumentation
Logic programming
Preferences
Non-monotonic reasoning
Inference
Logical programming
Circumscription
Revision
Preference
Semantics
Software engineering workshop
Safety
Artificial intelligence
ISSN:0004-3702, 1872-7921
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
Description
Summary:The abstract nature of Dung's seminal theory of argumentation accounts for its widespread application as a general framework for various species of non-monotonic reasoning, and, more generally, reasoning in the presence of conflict. A Dung argumentation framework is instantiated by arguments and a binary conflict based attack relation, defined by some underlying logical theory. The justified arguments under different extensional semantics are then evaluated, and the claims of these arguments define the inferences of the underlying theory. To determine a unique set of justified arguments often requires a preference relation on arguments to determine the success of attacks between arguments. However, preference information is often itself defeasible, conflicting and so subject to argumentation. Hence, in this paper we extend Dung's theory to accommodate arguments that claim preferences between other arguments, thus incorporating meta-level argumentation based reasoning about preferences in the object level. We then define and study application of the full range of Dung's extensional semantics to the extended framework, and study special classes of the extended framework. The extended theory preserves the abstract nature of Dung's approach, thus aiming at a general framework for non-monotonic formalisms that accommodate defeasible reasoning about as well as with preference information. We illustrate by formalising argument based logic programming with defeasible priorities in the extended theory.
Bibliography:ObjectType-Article-2
SourceType-Scholarly Journals-1
ObjectType-Feature-1
content type line 23
ISSN:0004-3702
1872-7921
DOI:10.1016/j.artint.2009.02.001