Abstract
We study invariant local expansion operators for conflict-free and admissible sets in Abstract Argumentation Frameworks (AFs). Such operators are directly applied on AFs, and are invariant with respect to a chosen ‘semantics’ (that is, w.r.t. each of the conflict-free/admissible sets of arguments). Accordingly, we derive a definition of robustness for AFs in terms of the number of times such operators can be applied without producing any change in the chosen semantics.
This work has been supported by: “ComPAArg” (Ricerca di base 2016–2018), “Argumentation 360” (Ricerca di Base 2017–2019) and “RACRA” (Ricerca di base 2018–2020).
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
Notes
- 1.
ConArg website: http://www.dmi.unipg.it/conarg.
- 2.
Disjoint w.r.t. edges of the graph G, maximal w.r.t. the number of attacks.
References
Baroni, P., Giacomin, M., Liao, B.: On topology-related properties of abstract argumentation semantics. A correction and extension to dynamics of argumentation systems: A division-based method. Artif. Intell. 212, 104–115 (2014). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.artint.2014.03.003
Baumann, R.: Normal and strong expansion equivalence for argumentation frameworks. Artif. Intell. 193, 18–44 (2012). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.artint.2012.08.004
Baumann, R.: Context-free and context-sensitive kernels: update and deletion equivalence in abstract argumentation. In: Schaub, T., Friedrich, G., O’Sullivan, B. (eds.) 21st European Conference on Artificial Intelligence, ECAI 2014, 18–22 August 2014, Prague, Czech Republic—Including Prestigious Applications of Intelligent Systems (PAIS 2014). Frontiers in Artificial Intelligence and Applications, vol. 263, pp. 63–68. IOS Press (2014). https://doi.org/10.3233/978-1-61499-419-0-63
Baumann, R., Brewka, G.: Expanding argumentation frameworks: enforcing and monotonicity results. In: Computational Models of Argument: Proceedings of COMMA, FAIA, vol. 216, pp. 75–86. IOS Press (2010)
Bistarelli, S., Faloci, F., Santini, F., Taticchi, C.: Studying dynamics in argumentation with rob. In: Modgil, S., Budzynska, K., Lawrence, J. (eds.) Computational Models of Argument—Proceedings of COMMA 2018, Warsaw, Poland, 12–14 September 2018. Frontiers in Artificial Intelligence and Applications, vol. 305, pp. 451–452. IOS Press (2018). https://doi.org/10.3233/978-1-61499-906-5-451
Bistarelli, S., Pirolandi, D., Santini, F.: Solving weighted argumentation frameworks with soft constraints. In: Larrosa, J., O’Sullivan, B. (eds.) Recent Advances in Constraints—14th Annual ERCIM International Workshop on Constraint Solving and Constraint Logic Programming, CSCLP 2009, Barcelona, Spain, 15–17 June 2009, Revised Selected Papers. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol. 6384, pp. 1–18. Springer, Heidelberg (2009). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-19486-3_1
Bistarelli, S., Rossi, F., Santini, F.: Conarg: a tool for classical and weighted argumentation. In: Baroni, P., Gordon, T.F., Scheffler, T., Stede, M. (eds.) Proceedings of Computational Models of Argument, COMMA 2016, Potsdam, Germany, 12–16 September, 2016. Frontiers in Artificial Intelligence and Applications, vol. 287, pp. 463–464. IOS Press (2016). https://doi.org/10.3233/978-1-61499-686-6-463
Bistarelli, S., Rossi, F., Santini, F.: A novel weighted defence and its relaxation in abstract argumentation. Int. J. Approx. Reason. 92, 66–86 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijar.2017.10.006
Bistarelli, S., Santini, F.: Modeling and solving AFs with a constraint-based tool: ConArg. In: Modgil, S., Oren, N., Toni, F. (eds.) First International Workshop on Theorie and Applications of Formal Argumentation, TAFA 2011. Barcelona, Spain, 16–17 July 2011, Revised Selected Papers. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol. 7132, pp. 99–116. Springer, Heidelberg (2011).https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-29184-5_7
Bistarelli, S., Santini, F.: Conarg: Argumentation with constraints. In: Ossowski, S., Toni, F., Vouros, G.A. (eds.) Proceedings of the First International Conference on Agreement Technologies, AT 2012, Dubrovnik, Croatia, 15–16 October 2012, CEUR Workshop Proceedings, vol. 918, pp. 197–198. CEUR-WS.org (2012). http://ceur-ws.org/Vol-918/111110197.pdf
Bistarelli, S., Santini, F., Taticchi, C.: On looking for invariant operators in argumentation semantics. In: Proceedings of the Thirty-First International Florida Artificial Intelligence Research Society Conference, FLAIRS., pp. 537–540. AAAI Press (2018)
Boella, G., da Costa Pereira, C., Tettamanzi, A., van der Torre, L.W.N.: Making others believe what they want. In: Artificial Intelligence in Theory and Practice II, IFIP 20th World Computer Congress, IFIP, vol. 276, pp. 215–224. Springer, Boston (2008)
Boella, G., Kaci, S., van der Torre, L.W.N.: Dynamics in argumentation with single extensions: abstraction principles and the grounded extension. In: 10th European Conference on Symbolic and Quantitative Approaches to Reasoning with Uncertainty, ECSQARU. LNCS, vol. 5590, pp. 107–118. Springer, Heidelberg (2009a)
Boella, G., Kaci, S., van der Torre, L.W.N.: Dynamics in argumentation with single extensions: attack refinement and the grounded extension (extended version). In: 6th International Workshop on Argumentation in Multi-Agent Systems, ArgMAS. LNCS, vol. 6057, pp. 150–159. Springer, Heidelberg (2009b)
Caminada, M.: On the issue of reinstatement in argumentation. In: 10th European Conference on Logics in Artificial Intelligence, JELIA pp. 111–123 (2006). https://doi.org/10.1007/11853886_11
Cayrol, C., de Saint-Cyr, F.D., Lagasquie-Schiex, M.: Revision of an argumentation system. In: Proceedings of the Eleventh International Conference on Principles of Knowledge Representation and Reasoning, KR, pp. 124–134. AAAI Press (2008)
Cayrol, C., de Saint-Cyr, F.D., Lagasquie-Schiex, M.: Change in abstract argumentation frameworks: adding an argument. J. Artif. Intell. Res. 38, 49–84 (2010). https://doi.org/10.1613/jair.2965
Croitoru, C., Kötzing, T.: A normal form for argumentation frameworks. In: Second International Workshop on Theory and Applications of Formal Argumentation, TAFA. LNCS, vol. 8306, pp. 32–45. Springer, Heidelberg (2013)
Dix, J., Hansson, S.O., Kern-Isberner, G., Simari, G.R.: Belief change and argumentation in multi-agent scenarios. Ann. Math. Artif. Intell. 78(3–4), 177–179 (2016)
Dung, P.M.: On the acceptability of arguments and its fundamental role in nonmonotonic reasoning, logic programming and n-person games. Artif. Intell. 77(2), 321–358 (1995). https://doi.org/10.1016/0004-3702(94)00041-X
Liao, B.S., Jin, L., Koons, R.C.: Dynamics of argumentation systems: a division-based method. Artif. Intell. 175(11), 1790–1814 (2011). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.artint.2011.03.006
Oikarinen, E., Woltran, S.: Characterizing strong equivalence for argumentation frameworks. Artif. Intell. 175(14–15), 1985–2009 (2011). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.artint.2011.06.003
Rienstra, T., Sakama, C., van der Torre, L.W.N.: Persistence and monotony properties of argumentation semantics. In: Third International Workshop on Theory and Applications of Formal Argumentation, TAFA. LNCS, vol. 9524, pp. 211–225. Springer, Cham (2015)
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2019 Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd.
About this paper
Cite this paper
Bistarelli, S., Santini, F., Taticchi, C. (2019). Local Expansion Invariant Operators in Argumentation Semantics. In: Liao, B., Ågotnes, T., Wang, Y. (eds) Dynamics, Uncertainty and Reasoning. CLAR 2018. Logic in Asia: Studia Logica Library. Springer, Singapore. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-13-7791-4_3
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-13-7791-4_3
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Singapore
Print ISBN: 978-981-13-7790-7
Online ISBN: 978-981-13-7791-4
eBook Packages: Religion and PhilosophyPhilosophy and Religion (R0)