Document Open Access Logo

Hunt for the Collapse of Semantics in Infinite Abstract Argumentation Frameworks

Author Christof Spanring

PDF

File

Thumbnail PDF
PDF
OASIcs.ICCSW.2015.70.pdf
  • Filesize: 463 kB
  • 8 pages

Document Identifiers

Subject Classification

Keywords
  • Abstract Argumentation
  • Infinity
  • Argumentation Semantics
  • Discrete Structures

Metrics

  • Access Statistics
  • Total Accesses (updated on a weekly basis)
    0
    PDF Downloads
    0
    Metadata Views

Abstract

In this work we discuss examples of infinite abstract argumentation frameworks (AFs). Our focus is mainly on existence of extensions of semantics such as semi-stable and stage semantics, as opposed to the collapse where some argumentation frameworks prevent any extension. We visit known examples from the literature and present novel variants. Finally, we also give insights into extension existence conditions.

Cite As Get BibTex

Christof Spanring. Hunt for the Collapse of Semantics in Infinite Abstract Argumentation Frameworks. In 2015 Imperial College Computing Student Workshop (ICCSW 2015). Open Access Series in Informatics (OASIcs), Volume 49, pp. 70-77, Schloss Dagstuhl – Leibniz-Zentrum für Informatik (2015) https://doi.org/10.4230/OASIcs.ICCSW.2015.70

Author Details

Christof Spanring

References

  1. Pietro Baroni, Federico Cerutti, Paul E. Dunne, and Massimiliano Giacomin. Automata for infinite argumentation structures. Artif. Intell., 203:104-150, 2013. Google Scholar
  2. Pietro Baroni and Massimiliano Giacomin. Semantics of abstract argument systems. In Iyad Rahwan and Guillermo Ricardo Simari, editors, Argumentation in Artificial Intelligence, chapter 2, pages 25-44. Springer, 2009. Google Scholar
  3. Ringo Baumann and Christof Spanring. Infinite argumentation frameworks. Advances in Knowledge Representation, Logic Programming, and Abstract Argumentation, pages 281-295, 2015. Google Scholar
  4. Trevor J. M. Bench-Capon, Katie Atkinson, and Alison Chorley. Persuasion and value in legal argument. J. Log. Comput., 15(6):1075-1097, 2005. Google Scholar
  5. Trevor J. M. Bench-Capon and Paul E. Dunne. Argumentation in artificial intelligence. Artif. Intell., 171(10-15):619-641, 2007. Google Scholar
  6. Martin W. A. Caminada and Dov M. Gabbay. A logical account of formal argumentation. Studia Logica, 93(2):109-145, 2009. Google Scholar
  7. Martin W. A. Caminada and Nir Oren. Grounded semantics and infinitary argumentation frameworks. In Procs. of the 26th Benelux Conference on Artificial Intelligence (BNAIC'14), 2014. Google Scholar
  8. Martin W. A. Caminada and Bart Verheij. On the existence of semi-stable extensions. In Procs. of the 22nd Benelux Conference on Artificial Intelligence (BNAIC'10), 2010. Google Scholar
  9. Phan Minh Dung. 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. Google Scholar
  10. Paul E. Dunne, Wolfgang Dvořák, Thomas Linsbichler, and Stefan Woltran. Characteristics of multiple viewpoints in abstract argumentation. In Chitta Baral, Giuseppe De Giacomo, and Thomas Eiter, editors, Proceedings of the 14th International Conference on Principles of Knowledge Representation and Reasoning (KR 2014), pages 72-81. AAAI Press, 2014. Google Scholar
  11. Wolfgang Dvořák and Christof Spanring. Comparing the expressiveness of argumentation semantics. In Bart Verheij, Stefan Szeider, and Stefan Woltran, editors, Proceedings of the 4th Conference on Computational Models of Argument (COMMA 2012), volume 245 of Frontiers in Artificial Intelligence and Applications, pages 261-272. IOS Press, 2012. Google Scholar
  12. Wolfgang Dvořák and Stefan Woltran. On the intertranslatability of argumentation semantics. J. Artif. Intell. Res. (JAIR), 41:445-475, 2011. Google Scholar
  13. Nikos Gorogiannis and Anthony Hunter. Instantiating abstract argumentation with classical logic arguments: Postulates and properties. Artif. Intell., 175(9):1479-1497, 2011. Google Scholar
  14. Charles Leonard Hamblin. Fallacies. Methuen London, 1970. Google Scholar
  15. Sanjay Modgil. Reasoning about preferences in argumentation frameworks. Artif. Intell., 173(9-10):901-934, 2009. Google Scholar
  16. Rudy Rucker. Infinity and the Mind: The Science and Philosophy of the Infinite (Princeton Science Library). Princeton University Press, 2004. Google Scholar
  17. Christof Spanring. Axiom of choice, maximal independent sets, argumentation and dialogue games. 2014 Imperial College Computing Student Workshop, pages 91-98, 2014. Google Scholar
  18. Bart Verheij. Deflog: on the logical interpretation of prima facie justified assumptions. J. Log. Comput., 13(3):319-346, 2003. Google Scholar
  19. Douglas N Walton. Logical Dialogue-Games. University Press of America, Lanham, Maryland, 1984. Google Scholar
  20. Emil Weydert. Semi-stable extensions for infinite frameworks. In Procs. of the 23rd Benelux Conference on Artificial Intelligence (BNAIC'11), pages 336-343, 2011. Google Scholar
Questions / Remarks / Feedback
X

Feedback for Dagstuhl Publishing


Thanks for your feedback!

Feedback submitted

Could not send message

Please try again later or send an E-mail
© 2023-2025 Schloss Dagstuhl – LZI GmbH About DROPS Imprint Privacy Contact