On decision problems related to the preferred semantics for argumentation frameworks

Journal of Logic and Computation

Volumn 13, Issue 3, 2003, Pages 377-403

  Cayrol, Claudette ^a   Doutre, Sylvie ^a   Mengin, Jerome ^a  

^a IRIT   (France)

Author keywords

Argumentation; Decision problems; Preferred semantics; Proof theory

Indexed keywords

ALGORITHMS; ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE; PROBLEM SOLVING; SEMANTICS;

ARGUMENTATION THEORY;

DECISION THEORY;

EID: 0041841546     PISSN: 0955792X     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1093/logcom/13.3.377     Document Type: Article

References (21)

1. L. Amgoud and C. Cayrol. A reasoning model based on the production of acceptable arguments. In Proceedings of NMR 2000, pp. 1-7. Breckenbridge, Colorado, April 2000.
2. C. Berge. Graphs and Hypergraphs. North-Holland Mathematical Library, North-Holland, 1973.
3. A. Bondarenko, P.M. Dung, R.A. Kowalski, and F. Toni. An abstract, argumentation-theoretic approach to default reasoning. Artificial Intelligence, 93, 63-101, 1997.
4. C. Cayrol, S. Doutre, and J. Mengin. Dialectical proof theories for the credulous preferred semantics of argumentation frameworks. In ECSQARU 2001, volume 2143 of Lecture Notes in Artificial Intelligence, pp. 668-679. Springer-Verlag, 2001.
5. C. Cayrol, S. Doutre, and J. Mengin. Dialectical Proof Theories for the Credulous Preferred Semantics of Argumentation Frameworks. Technical Report 2001-09-R, IRIT, May 2001.
6. C.I. Chesn�evar, A.G. Maguitman, and R.P. Loui. Logical models of Argument. ACM Computing Surveys, 32, 337-383, 2000.
7. Y. Dimopoulos, V. Magirou, and C.H. Papadimitriou. On kernels, defaults and even graphs. Annals of Mathematics and AI, 20, 1-12, 1997.
8. Y. Dimopoulos, B. Nebel, and F. Toni. On the computational complexity of assumption-based argumentation for default reasoning. Artificial Intelligence, 141, 57-78, 2002.
9. Y. Dimopoulos and A. Torres. Graph theoretical structures in logic programs and default theories. Theoretical Computer Science, 170, 209-244, 1996.
10. S. Doutre and J. Mengin. Preferred Extensions of Argumentation Frameworks: Computation and Query Answering. In IJCAR 2001, R. GoreÌ A. Leitsch, and T. Nipkow, eds, volume 2083 of Lecture Notes in Artificial Intelligence, pp. 272-288. Springer-Verlag, 2001.
11. P.M. Dung. On the acceptability of arguments and its fundamental role in non-monotonic reasoning, logic programming and n-person games. Artificial Intelligence, 77, 321-357, 1995.
12. P.E. Dunne and T.J.M. Bench-Capon. Two Party Immediate Response Disputes: Properties and Efficiency. Technical Report ULCS-01-005, Department of Computer Science, University of Liverpool, October 2001.
13. P.E. Dunne and T.J.M. Bench-Capon. Coherence in finite argument systems. Artificial Intelligence, 141, 187-203, 2002.
14. M. Gelfond and V. Lifschitz. The stable model semantics for logic programming. In Proceedings of ICLP'88. MIT Press, 1988.
15. H. Jakobovits and D. Vermeir. Dialectic semantics for argumentation frameworks. In Proceedings of ICAIL'99, pp. 53-62. ACM Press, 1999.
16. A.C. Kakas and F. Toni. Computing Argumentation in Logic Programming. Journal of Logic and Computation, 9, 515-562, 1999.
17. D. Poole. A logical framework for default reasoning. Artificial Intelligence, 36, 27-47, 1988.
18. H. Prakken and G. Sartor. Argument-based logic programming with defeasible priorities. Journal of Applied Non-Classical Logics, 7, 25-75, 1997.
19. H. Prakken and G. Vreeswijk. Logics for defeasible argumentation. In Handbook of Philosophical Logic, pp. 219-318. Kluwer Academic Publishers, Dordrecht/Boston/London, second edition, 2002.
20. R. Reiter. A logic for default reasoning. Artificial Intelligence, 13, 81-132, 1980.
21. G.A.W. Vreeswijk and H. Prakken. Credulous and Sceptical Argument Games for Preferred Semantics. In Proceedings, of JELIA'2000, volume 1919 of Lecture Notes in Artificial Intelligence, pp. 239-253, 2000.