Credulous and Skeptical Argument Games for Complete Semantics in Conflict Resolution based Argumentation

04/28/2014
by   Jozef Frtús, et al.
0

Argumentation is one of the most popular approaches of defining a non-monotonic formalism and several argumentation based semantics were proposed for defeasible logic programs. Recently, a new approach based on notions of conflict resolutions was proposed, however with declarative semantics only. This paper gives a more procedural counterpart by developing skeptical and credulous argument games for complete semantics and soundness and completeness theorems for both games are provided. After that, distribution of defeasible logic program into several contexts is investigated and both argument games are adapted for multi-context system.

READ FULL TEXT

page 1

page 2

page 3

page 4

research
07/10/2002

Well-Founded Argumentation Semantics for Extended Logic Programming

This paper defines an argumentation semantics for extended logic program...
research
03/19/2021

Weakly Complete Semantics Based on Undecidedness Blocking

In this paper we introduce a novel family of semantics called weakly com...
research
09/12/2023

Games and Argumentation: Time for a Family Reunion!

The rule "defeated(X) ← attacks(Y,X), defeated(Y)" states that an argum...
research
11/08/2018

On the Graded Acceptability of Arguments in Abstract and Instantiated Argumentation

The paper develops a formal theory of the degree of justification of arg...
research
08/09/2017

Measuring Inconsistency in Argument Graphs

There have been a number of developments in measuring inconsistency in l...
research
12/14/2016

Web-based Argumentation

Assumption-Based Argumentation (ABA) is an argumentation framework that ...
research
12/16/2013

Strategic Argumentation is NP-Complete

In this paper we study the complexity of strategic argumentation for dia...

Please sign up or login with your details

Forgot password? Click here to reset