Abstract
Data intensive applications with the capability of handling uncertain, imprecise, and inconsistent information are in constant demand. Efficient computational systems that can perform complicated inferences, obtain the appropriate conclusions, and explain the results are increasingly being required to act upon large databases. Argumentation systems could be used in the construction of interactive systems that are able to reason with large databases and/or different data sources. Notwithstanding, there are two important issues that need to be resolved in order to use argumentation in this kind of practical applications: adding the ability to deal with explicit uncertainty, and improving the computational complexity of argumentation, which so far has been an obstacle for its integration into interactive systems acting on large databases. In this paper we propose an argumentation-based system that has been engineered to address these issues.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Preview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
References
Alsinet, T., Chesñevar, C.I., Godo, L., Sandri, S., Simari, G.R.: Formalizing argumentative reasoning in a possibilistic logic programming setting with fuzzy unification. International Journal of Approximate Reasoning 48(3), 711–729 (2008)
Alsinet, T., Chesñevar, C.I., Godo, L., Simari, G.R.: R Simari. A logic programming framework for possibilistic argumentation: Formalization and logical properties. Fuzzy Sets and Systems 159(10), 208–228 (2008)
Alsinet, T., Godo, L.: A complete calculus for possibilistic logic programming with fuzzy propositional variables. In: Proceedings of the Sixteenth Conference on Uncertainty in Artificial Intelligence (UAI-2000), pp. 1–10. ACM Press, New York (2000)
Berti, L.: Quality and recommendation of multi-source data for assisting technological intelligence applications. In: Proc. of 10th International Conference on Database and Expert Systems Applications, Italy, pp. 282–291. AAAI, Menlo Park (1999)
Bryant, D., Krause, P.: An implementation of a lightweight argumentation engine for agent applications. In: Fisher, M., van der Hoek, W., Konev, B., Lisitsa, A. (eds.) JELIA 2006. LNCS (LNAI), vol. 4160, pp. 469–472. Springer, Heidelberg (2006)
Capobianco, M., Chesñevar, C.I., Simari, G.R.: Argumentation and the dynamics of warranted beliefs in changing environments. Journal of Autonomous Agents and Multiagent Systems 11, 127–151 (2005)
Carbogim, D., Robertson, D., Lee, J.: Argument-based applications to knowledge engineering. The Knowledge Engineering Review 15(2), 119–149 (2000)
Chesñevar, C.I., Maguitman, A.G., Loui, R.P.: Logical Models of Argument. ACM Computing Surveys 32(4), 337–383 (2000)
Chesñevar, C.I., Maguitman, A.G., Simari, G.R.: Argument-based critics and recommenders: A qualitative perspective on user support systems. Data & Knowledge Engineering 59(2), 293–319 (2006)
Chesñevar, C.I., Maguitman, A.G.: ArgueNet: An Argument-Based Recommender System for Solving Web Search Queries. In: Proc. of Intl. IEEE Conference on Intelligent Systems IS-2004, Varna, Bulgaria (June 2004)
Chesñevar, C.I., Simari, G.R., Alsinet, T., Godo, L.: A logic programming framework for possibilistic argumentation with vague knowledge. In: Proc. of Uncertainty in Artificial Intelligence Conference (UAI 2004), Banff, Canada (2004) (to appear)
Doyle, J.: A Truth Maintenance System. Artificial Intelligence 12(3), 231–272 (1979)
Dubois, D., Lang, J., Prade, H.: Possibilistic logic. In: Gabbay, D., Hogger, C., Robinson, J. (eds.) Handbook of Logic in Art. Int. and Logic Prog. (Nonmonotonic Reasoning and Uncertain Reasoning), pp. 439–513. Oxford Univ. Press, Oxford (1994)
García, A., Simari, G.: Defeasible Logic Programming: An Argumentative Approach. Theory and Practice of Logic Programming 4(1), 95–138 (2004)
Gelfond, M., Lifschitz, V.: Classical negation in logic programs and disjunctive databases. New Generation Computing, 365–385 (1991)
Gomez, S.A., Chesñevar, C.I.: A Hybrid Approach to Pattern Classification Using Neural Networks and Defeasible Argumentation. In: Proc. of Intl. 17th FLAIRS Conference, Palm Beach, FL, USA, May 2004, pp. 393–398. AAAI, Menlo Park (2004)
Katsuno, H., Mendelzon, A.: On the difference between updating a knowledge base and revising it. In: Gardenfors, P. (ed.) Belief Revision, pp. 183–203. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge (1992)
Prakken, H., Vreeswijk, G.: Logical systems for defeasible argumentation. In: Handbook of Philosophical Logic, vol. 4, pp. 219–318 (2002)
Rahwan, I., Ramchurn, S.D., Jennings, N.R., McBurney, P., Parsons, S., Sonenberg, L.: Argumentation-based negotiation. The Knowledge Engineering Review 18(4), 343–375 (2003)
Simari, G.R., Loui, R.P.: A Mathematical Treatment of Defeasible Reasoning and its Implementation. Artificial Intelligence 53(1–2), 125–157 (1992)
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2009 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg
About this paper
Cite this paper
Capobianco, M., Simari, G.R. (2009). A Proposal for Making Argumentation Computationally Capable of Handling Large Repositories of Uncertain Data. In: Godo, L., Pugliese, A. (eds) Scalable Uncertainty Management. SUM 2009. Lecture Notes in Computer Science(), vol 5785. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-04388-8_9
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-04388-8_9
Publisher Name: Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg
Print ISBN: 978-3-642-04387-1
Online ISBN: 978-3-642-04388-8
eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)