Abstract
Matrices and the operation of dual interchange are introduced into the study of Dung’s argumentation frameworks. It is showed that every argumentation framework can be represented by a matrix, and the basic extensions (such as admissible, stable, complete) can be determined by sub-blocks of its matrix. In particular, an efficient approach for determining the basic extensions has been developed using two types of standard matrix. Furthermore, we develop the topic of matrix reduction along two different lines. The first one enables to reduce the matrix into a less order matrix playing the same role for the determination of extensions. The second one enables to decompose an extension into several extensions of different sub-argumentation frameworks. It makes us not only solve the problem of determining grounded and preferred extensions, but also obtain results about dynamics of argumentation frameworks.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Notes
- 1.
strictly speaking, it should be denoted by \(M_{AF}(i_{1}, i_{2}, ..., i_{n})\).
References
Baroni, P., Giacomin, M.: On principle-based evaluation of extension-based argumentation semantics. Artif. Intell. 171(10–15), 675–700 (2007)
Baroni, P., Giacomin, M.: Skepticism relations for comparing argumentation semantics. Int. J. Approximate Reasoning 50(6), 854–866 (2009)
Baroni, P., Giacomin, M., Guida, G.: SCC-recursiveness: a general schema for argumentation semantics. Artif. Intell. 168(1–2), 162–210 (2005)
Bench-Capon, T., Dunne, P.: Argumentation in artificial intelligence. Artif. Intell. 171(10–15), 619–641 (2007)
Boella, G., Kaci, S., van der Torre, L.: Dynamics in argumentation with single extensions: abstraction principles and the grounded extension. In: Sossai, C., Chemello, G. (eds.) ECSQARU 2009. LNCS, vol. 5590, pp. 107–118. Springer, Heidelberg (2009)
Boella, G., Kaci, S., van der Torre, L.: Dynamics in argumentation with single extensions: attack refinement and the grounded extension. In: 8th International Joint Conference on Autonomous Agents and Multi- Agent Systems AAMAS 2009, pp. 1213–1214. Budapest May (2009)
Caminada, M.: Semi-stable semantics. In: Proceedings of the First International Conference on Computational Models of Argument COMMA 2006, pp. 121–130. IOS Press, Liverpool (2006)
Caminada, M.: An algorithm for computing semi-stable semantics. In: Mellouli, K. (ed.) ECSQARU 2007. LNCS (LNAI), vol. 4724, pp. 222–234. Springer, Heidelberg (2007)
Carbogim, D.: Dynamics on formal argumentation. Ph.D. thesis (2000)
Cayrol, C., de St-Cyr, F.D., Lagasquie-Schiex, M.: Change in abstract argumentation frameworks: adding an argument. J. Artif. Intell. Res. 38(1), 49–84 (2010)
Cayrol, C., Xu, Y.: The matrix approach for abstract argumentation frameworks. Rapport de recherche RR-2015-01-FR, IRIT, University of Toulouse (February 2015). http://www.irit.fr/publis/ADRIA/PapersCayrol/Rapport-IRIT-CX-2015-02.pdf
Dimopoulos, Y., Torres, A.: Graph theoretical structures in logic programs and default theories. Theoret. Comput. Sci. 170(1–2), 209–244 (1996)
Dung, P.: On the acceptability of arguments and its fundamental role in nonmonotonic reasoning, logic programming and n-person games. Artif. Intell. 77, 321–357 (1995)
Dunne, P.: Computational properties of argument systems satisfying graph-theoretic constrains. Artif. Intell. 171, 701–729 (2007)
Falappa, M., Garcia, A., Simari, G.: Belief dynamics and defeasible argumentation in rational agents. In: Proceedings of the NMR 2004. pp. 164–170. Whistler, Canada (2004)
Gabbay, D.M.: Introducing equational semantics for argumentation networks. In: Liu, W. (ed.) ECSQARU 2011. LNCS, vol. 6717, pp. 19–35. Springer, Heidelberg (2011)
Liao, B., Li, J., Koons, R.: Dynamics of argumentation systems: a division-based method. Artif. Intell. 175, 1790–1814 (2011)
Modgil, S.: Reasoning about preferences in argumentation frameworks. Artif. Intell. 173, 901–934 (2009)
Modgil, S., Caminada, M.: Proof theories and algorithms for abstract argumentation frameworks. In: Simari, G., Rahwan, I. (eds.) Argumentation in Artificial Intelligence, pp. 105–129. Springer, Heidelberg (2009)
Rahwan, I., Simari, G.: Argumentation in Artificial Intelligence. Springer, Heidelberg (2009)
Rotstein, N., Moguillansky, M., Garcia, A., Simari, G.: An abstract argumentation framework for handling dynamics. In: Proceedings of the NMR 2008, pp. 131–139 (2008)
Verheij, B.: A labeling approach to the computation of credulous acceptance in argumentation. In: Proceedings of the IJCAI 2007, pp. 623–628. MIT Press (2007)
Vreeswijk, G.: Abstract argumentation system. Artif. Intell. 90, 225–279 (1997)
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2015 Springer International Publishing Switzerland
About this paper
Cite this paper
Xu, Y., Cayrol, C. (2015). The Matrix Approach for Abstract Argumentation Frameworks. In: Black, E., Modgil, S., Oren, N. (eds) Theory and Applications of Formal Argumentation. TAFA 2015. Lecture Notes in Computer Science(), vol 9524. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-28460-6_15
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-28460-6_15
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-319-28459-0
Online ISBN: 978-3-319-28460-6
eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)