Argumentation semantics for defeasible logic

Journal of Logic and Computation

Volumn 14, Issue 5, 2004, Pages 675-702

  Governatori, Guido ^a   Maher, Michael J ^b   Antoniou, Grigoris ^c   Billington, David ^d  

^a UNIVERSITY OF QUEENSLAND   (Australia)

^b UNIVERSITY OF NEW SOUTH WALES   (Australia)

^c INSTITUTE OF COMPUTER SCIENCE   (Greece)

^d GRIFFITH UNIVERSITY   (Australia)

Author keywords

Argumentation semantics; Defeasiblre logic; Nonmonotonic reasoning

Indexed keywords

ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE; COMPUTATIONAL COMPLEXITY; LINEAR SYSTEMS; MATHEMATICAL MODELS; SEMANTICS;

ARGUMENTATION SEMANTICS; DEFEASIBLE REASONING; NONMONOTONIC REASONING;

FORMAL LOGIC;

EID: 7544237999     PISSN: 0955792X     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1093/logcom/14.5.675     Document Type: Article

References (40)

1. G. Antoniou, D. Billington, G. Governatori and M.J. Maher. Representation results for defeasible logic. ACM Transactions on Computational Logic, 2, 255-287, 2001.
2. G. Antoniou, D. Billington, G. Governatori and M.J. Maher. A flexible framework for defeasible logic. Proc. American National Conference on Artificial Intelligence (AAAI-2000), 405-410, 2000.
3. G. Antoniou, D. Billington and M.J. Maher. Normal forms for defeasible logic. Proc. Joint International Conference and Symposium on Logic Programming, J. Jaffar, ed., pp. 160-174. MTT Press, 1998.
4. G. Antoniou, D. Billington and M.J. Maher. On the analysis of regulations using defeasible roles. Proceedings of the Thirty-second Annual Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences. TREE Press, 1999.
5. G. Antoniou, M. Maher and D. Billington, Defeasible logic versus logic programming without negation as failure. Journal of Logic Programming, 42, 47-57, 2000.
6. D. Billington. Defeasible logic is stable. Journal of Logic and Computation, 3, 370-400, 1993.
7. A. Bondarenko, P.M. Dung, R. Kowalski, and F. Toni. An abstract, argumentation-theoretic framework for default reasoning. Artificial Intelligence, 93, 63-101, 1997.
8. C.I. Chesñevar, A.G. Maguitman, R.P. Loui: Logical models of argument ACM Computing Surveys, 32, 337-383, 2000.
9. J.P. Delgrande and T. Schaub. Expressing preferences in default logic. Artificial Intelligence, 124, 41-87, 2000.
10. Y. Dimopoulos and A. Kakas. Logic programming without negation as failure. In Proceedings ICLP-95, pp. 369-384. MTT Press, 1995.
11. P.M. Dung. An argumentation semantics for logic programming with explicit negation. In Proceedings of the Tenth Logic Programming Conference, pp. 616-630. MIT Press, Cambridge.
12. 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.
13. G. Governatori, A.H.M. ter Hofstede and P. Oaks. Defeasible Logic for Automated Negotiation, Proceedings of ColleCTeR, P.M. Swatman and P. Swatman, eds. Deakin University, 2000.
14. G. Governatori, M. Dumas, A.H.M. ter Hofstede and P. Oaks. A formal approach to protocols and strategies for (legal) negotiation. Proceedings of the Eighteenth International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Law, pp. 168-177. ACM Press, New York, 2001.
15. G. Governatori and M.J. Maher. An argumentation-theoretic characterization of defeasible logic. ECAI 2000. Proceedings of the Fourteenth European Conference on Artificial Intelligence, W. Horn, ed., pp. 469-474. IOS Press, Amsterdam, 2000.
16. G. Governatori, M.J. Maher, G. Antoniou and D. Billington. Argumentation semantics for defeasible logics. Proceedings of the Pacific Rim Conference on Artificial Intelligence, pp. 27-37, 2000.
17. G. Governatori and V. Padmanabhan. A defeasible logic of policy-based intention. Proceeings of the Sixteenth Australian Conference on Artificial Intelligence, pp. 414-426. Springer, 2003.
18. B.N. Grosof. Prioritized conflict handling for logic programs. Proceedings of the International Logic Programming Symposium, J. Maluszynski, ed. pp. 197-211. MIT Press, 1997.
19. B.N. Grosof, Y. Labrou, and H.Y. Chan. A declarative approach to business roles in contracts: courteous logic programs in XML. In Proceedings of the First ACM Conference on Electronic Commerce (EC-99), ACM Press, 1999.
20. J.F. Horty. Some direct theories of nonmonotonic inheritance. In Handbook of Logic in Artificial Intelligence and Logic Programming Vol. 3, D.M. Gabbay, C.J. Hogger and J.A. Robinson, eds., pp. 111-187. Oxford University Press, 1994.
21. H. Jakobovits and D. Vermeir. Robust semantics for argumentation frameworks. Journal of Logic and Computation, 9, 215-261, 1999.
22. A. Kakas and F. Toni. Computing arguments in logic programming. Journal of Logic and Computation, 9, 515-562, 1999.
23. R. Kowalski and F. Toni. Abstract Argumentation. Artificial Intelligence and Law, 4, 275-296, 1996.
24. K. Kunen. Negation in logic programming. Journal of Logic Programming, 4, 289-308, 1987.
25. M. Maher, A denotational semantics for defeasible logic, Proceedings of the First International Conference on Computational Logic, volume 1861 of Lecture Notes in Artificial Intelligence, pp. 209-222. Springer, 2000.
26. M. Maher, Propositional defeasible logic has linear complexity, Theory and Practice of Logic Programming, 1, 691-711, 2001.
27. M. Maher, A model-theoretic semantics for defeasible logic. Proceedings of the Workshop on Paraconsistent Computational Logic, pp. 67-80. Springer, 2002.
28. M. Maher, G. Antoniou and D. Billington. A study of provability in defeasible logic. Proceedings of the Australian Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence, volume 1502 of Lecture Notes in Artificial Intelligence, pp. 215-226, Springer, 1998.
29. M. Maher and G. Governatori. A semantic decomposition of defeasible logics. Proceedings of the American National Conference on Artificial Intelligence (AAAI-99), pp. 299-305, Springer, 1999.
30. M.J. Maher, A. Rock, G. Antoniou, D. Billington and T. Miller. Efficient defeasible reasoning systems. International Journal on Artificial Intelligence Tools, 10, 483-501, 2001.
31. D. Nute. Defeasible reasoning. Proceedings of the Twentieth Hawaii International Conference on Systems Science, pp. 470-477. IEEE Press 1987.
32. D. Nute. Defeasible logic. In Handbook of Logic in Artificial Intelligence and Logic Programming Vol. 3, D.M. Gabbay, C.J. Hogger and J.A. Robinson, eds., pp. 353-395. Oxford University Press 1994.
33. H. Prakken. Logical Tools for Modelling Legal Argument: A Study of Defeasible Reasoning in Law. Kluwer Academic Publishers, 1997.
34. H. Prakken and G. Sartor. Argument-based extended logic programming with defeasible priorities. Journal of Applied and Non-Classical Logics, 7, 25-75, 1997.
35. H. Prakken and G. Vreeswijk. Logics for defeasible argumentation. In Handbook of Philosophical Logic, 2nd edition, Vol. 4, D.M. Gabbay and F. Guenthner, eds., pp. 219-318. Kluwer, 2001.
36. D.M. Reeves, B.N. Grosof, M.P. Wellman, and H.Y. Chan. Towards a declarative language for negotiating executable contracts, Proceedings of the AAAI-99 Workshop on Artificial Intelligence in Electronic Commerce (AIEC-99), AAAI Press/MIT Press, 1999.
37. G.R. Simari and R.P. Loui. A mathematical treatment of argumentation and its implementation. Artificial Intelligence, 53, 125-157, 1992.
38. L.A. Stein. Resolving ambiguity in nonmonotonic inheritance hierarchies. Artificial Intelligence, 55, 259-310, 1992.
39. D.D. Touretzky, J.F. Horty and R.H. Thomason. A clash of intuitions: the current state of nonmonotonic multiple inheritance systems. Proceedings of IJCAI-87, pp. 476-482, Morgan Kaufmann, 1987.
40. G. Vreeswijk. Abstract argumentation Systems. Artificial Intelligence, 90, 225-279, 1997.