Complete extensions in argumentation coincide with 3-valued stable models in logic programming

Studia Logica

Volumn 93, Issue 2, 2009, Pages 383-403

  Wu, Yining ^a   Caminada, Martin ^a   Gabbay, Dov M ^a,b,c  

^a UNIVERSITY OF LUXEMBOURG   (Luxembourg)

^b KING'S COLLEGE LONDON   (United Kingdom)

^c BAR ILAN UNIVERSITY   (Israel)

Author keywords

3 valued stable models; Abstract argumentation; Complete extensions; Logic programming

Indexed keywords

EID: 71149107231     PISSN: 00393215     EISSN: 15728730     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1007/s11225-009-9210-5     Document Type: Article

References (16)

1. Caminada, M. W. A., 'On the issue of reinstatement in argumentation', in M. Fischer, W. van der Hoek, B. Konev, and A. Lisitsa, (eds.), Logics in Artificial Intelligence; 10th European Conference, JELIA 2006, Springer, 2006, pp. 111-123. LNAI 4160.
2. Caminada, M. W. A., 'On the issue of reinstatement in argumentation', Technical Report UU-CS-2006-023, Institute of Information and Computing Sciences, Utrecht University, 2006.
3. Caminada, M. W. A., 'Semi-stable semantics', in P. E. Dunne and T. J. M. Bench-Capon, (eds.), Computational Models of Argument; Proceedings of COMMA 2006, IOS Press, 2006, pp. 121-130.
4. Caminada, M. W. A., 'An algorithm for computing semi-stable semantics', in Proceedings of the 9th European Conference on Symbolic and Quantitalive Approaches to Reasoning with Uncertainty (ECSQARU 2007), number 4724 in Springer Lecture Notes in AI, Berlin, Springer Verlag, 2007, pp. 222-234.
5. Caminada M. W. A., L. Amgoud (2007) 'On the evaluation of argumentation formalisms'. Artificial Intelligence 171(5-6): 286-310.
6. Dung P. M. (1995) 'On the acceptability of arguments and its fundamental role in nonmonotonic reasoning, logic programming and n-person games'. Artificial Intelligence 77: 321-357.
7. Dung P. M., Mancarella P., Toni F. (2007) 'Computing ideal sceptical argumentation'. Artificial Intelligence 171(10-15): 642-674.
8. Eiter T., Leone N., Saccá D. (1997) 'On the partial semantics for disjunctive deductive databases'. Ann. Math. Artif. Intell. 19(1-2): 59-96.
9. Gabbay D. M., Garcez A. (2009) 'Logical modes of attack in argumentation networks'. Studia Logica 93(2-3): 199-230.
10. Jakobovits H., Vermeir D. (1999) 'Robust semantics for argumentation frameworks'. Journal of logic and computation 9(2): 215-261.
11. Pollock J. L. (1995) Cognitive Carpentry A Blueprint for How to Build a Person. MIT Press, Cambridge, MA.
12. Prakken, H., 'An abstract framework for argumentation with structured arguments', Technical Report UU-CS-2009-019, Department of Information and Computing Sciences, Utrecht University, 2009.
13. Prakken H., Sartor G. (1997) 'Argument-based extended logic programming with defeasible priorities'. Journal of Applied Non-Classical Logics 7: 25-75.
14. Przymusinski T. C. (1990) 'The well-founded semantics coincides with the three-valued stable semantics'. Fundamenta Informaticae 13(4): 445-463.
15. Verheij, B., 'A labeling approach to the computation of credulous acceptance in argumentation', in Manuela M. Veloso, editor, Proceedings of the 20th International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence, Hyderabad, India, 2007, pp. 623-628.
16. Vreeswijk, G. A. W., 'An algorithm to compute minimally grounded and admissible defence sets in argument systems', in P. E. Dunne and T. J. M. Bench-Capon, (eds.), Computational Models of Argument; Proceedings of COMMA 2006, IOS, 2006, pp. 109-120.