Computational properties of argument systems satisfying graph-theoretic constraints

Artificial Intelligence

Volumn 171, Issue 10-15, 2007, Pages 701-729

  Dunne, Paul E ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF LIVERPOOL   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

Argumentation frameworks; Computational complexity; Computational properties of argumentation

Indexed keywords

ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE; COMPUTATIONAL COMPLEXITY; COMPUTATIONAL METHODS; DECISION THEORY; POLYNOMIALS; SEMANTICS;

ARGUMENTATION FRAMEWORKS; COMPUTATIONAL PROPERTIES; THEORETIC RESTRICTIONS;

GRAPH THEORY;

EID: 34548021202     PISSN: 00043702     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.artint.2007.03.006     Document Type: Article

References (41)

1. Amgoud L., and Cayrol C. A reasoning model based on the production of acceptable arguments. Ann. Math. Artificial Intelligence 34 (2002) 197-215
2. Arnborg S., Corneil D.G., and Proskurowski A. Complexity of finding embeddings in a k-tree. SIAM J. Alg. Disc. Methods 8 (1987) 277-284
3. Arnborg S., Lagergren J., and Seese D. Easy problems for tree-decomposable graphs. J. Algorithms 12 (1991) 308-340
4. Arnborg S., and Proskurowski A. Characterization and recognition of partial 3-trees. SIAM J. Alg. Disc. Methods 7 (1986) 305-314
5. Baroni P., and Giacomin M. Solving semantic problems with odd-length cycles in argumentation. Proc. 7th European Conf. on Symbolic and Quantitative Approaches to Reasoning With Uncertainty (ECSQARU). Lecture Notes in Artificial Intelligence vol. 2711 (2003), Springer-Verlag, Berlin 440-451
6. Baroni P., Giacomin M., and Guida G. SCC-recursiveness: a general schema for argumentation semantics. Artificial Intelligence 168 1-2 (2005) 162-210
7. Beame P., and Pitassi T. Propositional proof complexity: Past, present, and future. Bull. EATCS 65 (1998) 66-89
8. Bench-Capon T.J.M. Agreeing to differ: Modelling persuasive dialogue between parties with different values. Informal Logic 22 3 (2002) 231-245
9. Bench-Capon T.J.M. Persuasion in practical argument using value-based argumentation frameworks. J. Logic Comput. 13 3 (2003) 429-448
10. Bench-Capon T.J.M., Doutre S., and Dunne P.E. Audiences in argumentation frameworks. Artificial Intelligence 171 (2007) 42-71
11. Berge C. Graphs and Hypergraphs (1973), North-Holland, Amsterdam
12. Bodlaender H.L. Dynamic programming on graphs with bounded treewidth. Proc. 15th ICALP. Lecture Notes in Computer Science vol. 317 (1988), Springer-Verlag, Berlin 105-119
13. Bodlaender H.L. A linear time algorithm for finding tree-decompositions of small treewidth. SIAM J. Comput. 25 (1996) 1305-1317
14. Bodlaender H.L. A partial k-arboretum of graphs with bounded treewidth. Theoret. Comput. Sci. 209 (1998) 1-45
15. Bondarenko A., Dung P.M., Kowalski R.A., and Toni F. An abstract, argumentation-theoretic approach to default reasoning. Artificial Intelligence 93 (1997) 63-101
16. Cook S.A., and Reckhow R.A. The relative complexity of propositional proof systems. J. Symbolic Logic 44 1 (1979) 36-50
17. Coste-Marquis S., Devred C., and Marquis P. Symmetric argumentation frameworks. In: Godo L. (Ed). Proc. 8th European Conf. on Symbolic and Quantitative Approaches to Reasoning With Uncertainty (ECSQARU). Lecture Notes in Artificial Intelligence vol. 3571 (2005), Springer-Verlag, Berlin 317-328
18. Courcelle B. The monadic second-order logic of graphs. I. Recognizable sets of finite graphs. Inform. Comput. 85 1 (1990) 12-75
19. Courcelle B. The monadic second-order logic of graphs III: tree-decompositions, minor and complexity issues. Informatique Théorique et Applications 26 (1992) 257-286
20. Dimopoulos Y., Nebel B., and Toni F. On the computational complexity of assumption-based argumentation for default reasoning. Artificial Intelligence 141 (2002) 55-78
21. Dimopoulos Y., and Torres A. Graph theoretical structures in logic programs and default theories. Theoret. Comput. Sci. 170 (1996) 209-244
22. Downey R.G., and Fellows M.R. Fixed parameter tractability and completeness I: basic results. SIAM J. Comput. 24 (1995) 873-921
23. Dung P.M. On the acceptability of arguments and its fundamental role in nonmonotonic reasoning, logic programming and n-person games. Artificial Intelligence 77 (1995) 321-357
24. Dung P.M., Kowalski R.A., and Toni F. Dialectic proof procedures for assumption-based, admissible argumentation. Artificial Intelligence 170 2 (2006) 114-159
25. Dunne P.E. The Complexity of Boolean Networks (1988), Academic Press, New York
26. Dunne P.E. Complexity properties of restricted abstract argument systems. In: Dunne P.E., and Bench-Capon T.J.M. (Eds). Computational Models of Argument (Proc. COMMA 2006). Frontiers in Artificial Intelligence and Applications vol. 144 (2006), IOS Press, Amsterdam 85-96
27. Dunne P.E., and Bench-Capon T.J.M. Coherence in finite argument systems. Artificial Intelligence 141 (2002) 187-203
28. Dunne P.E., and Bench-Capon T.J.M. Two party immediate response disputes: properties and efficiency. Artificial Intelligence 149 (2003) 221-250
29. Dunne P.E., and Bench-Capon T.J.M. Complexity in value-based argument systems. Proc. 9th JELIA. Lecture Notes in Artificial Intelligence vol. 3229 (2004), Springer-Verlag, Berlin 360-371
30. Fraenkel A.S. Planar kernel and Grundy number with d ≤ 3, d . o u t ≤ 2, d . in ≤ 2 are np-complete. Disc. Appl. Math. 3 4 (1981) 257-262
31. Garey M.R., and Johnson D.S. Computers and Intractability: A Guide to the Theory of np-Completeness (1979), W.H. Freeman, New York
32. Gottlob G., Scarcello F., and Sideri M. Fixed-parameter complexity in AI and nonmonotonic reasoning. Artificial Intelligence 138 (2002) 55-86
33. Hopcroft J.E., and Wong J.K. Linear time algorithm for isomorphism of planar graphs (preliminary report). STOC '74: Proc. of the 6th Annual ACM Symposium on Theory of Computing (1974), ACM Press, New York 172-184
34. Lipton R.J., and Tarjan R.E. A separator theorem for planar graphs. SIAM J. Appl. Math. 36 (1979) 177-189
35. McColl W.F. Planar crossovers. IEEE Trans. Comput. C-30 (1981) 223-225
36. Papadimitriou C.H. Computational Complexity (1994), Addison-Wesley, Reading, MA
37. Robertson N., and Seymour P.D. Graph minors II: algorithmic aspects of treewidth. J. Algorithms 7 (1986) 309-322
38. Szeider S. On fixed-parameter tractable parameterizations of SAT. SAT'03. Lecture Notes in Computer Science vol. 2919 (2003), Springer-Verlag, Berlin 188-202
39. Urquhart A. The complexity of propositional proofs. Bull. Symbolic Logic 1 4 (1995) 425-467
40. Vreeswijk G., and Prakken H. Credulous and sceptical argument games for preferred semantics. Proceedings of JELIA'2000, The 7th European Workshop on Logic for Artificial Intelligence. Lecture Notes in Artificial Intelligence vol. 1919 (2000), Springer-Verlag, Berlin 224-238
41. M. Yannakakis, Algorithms for acyclic database schemes, in: C. Zaniolo, C. Delobel (Eds.), Proc. Internat. Conference on Very Large Data Bases (VLDB'81), 1981, pp. 82-94