Reasoning in Argumentation Frameworks Using Quantified Boolean Formulas

Frontiers in Artificial Intelligence and Applications

Volumn 144, Issue , 2006, Pages 133-144

  Egly, Uwe ^a   Woltran, Stefan ^a  

^a VIENNA UNIVERSITY OF TECHNOLOGY   (Austria)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

BOOLEAN FUNCTIONS; PROBLEM SOLVING;

ARGUMENTATION FRAMEWORKS; BLACK BOXES; DECISION PROBLEMS; DEDUCTIVE SYSTEMS; EFFICIENT SOLVERS; GENERIC APPROACH; POLYNOMIAL HIERARCHIES; QUANTIFIED BOOLEAN FORMULAS; REASONING TASKS; TOOL BOXES;

SEMANTICS;

EID: 84940487242     PISSN: 09226389     EISSN: 18798314     Source Type: Book Series    
DOI: None     Document Type: Conference Paper

References (27)

1. P. M. Dung. On the acceptability of arguments and its fundamental role in nonmonotonic reasoning, logic programming, and n-person games. Artificial Intelligence, 77(2):321-358, 1995.
2. R. C. Moore. Semantical considerations on nonmonotonic logic. Artificial Intelligence, 25:75-94, 1985.
3. R. Reiter. A logic for default reasoning. Artificial Intelligence, 13(1-2):81-132, 1980.
4. A. Bondarenko, P. M. Dung, R. A. Kowalski, and F. Toni. An abstract, argumentationtheoretic approach to default reasoning. Artificial Intelligence, 93(1-2):63-101, 1997.
5. Y. Dimopoulos, B. Nebel, and F. Toni. On the computational complexity of assumption-based argumentation for default reasoning. Artificial Intelligence, 141(1/2):57-78, 2002.
6. H. Kautz, D. McAllester, and B. Selman. Encoding plans in propositional logic. In Proc. KR'96, pages 374-384. Morgan Kaufmann Publishers, 1996.
7. H. Kautz and B. Selman. Planning as satisfiability. In Proc. ECAI'92, pages 359-363. 1992.
8. J. Rintanen. Constructing conditional pans by a theorem prover. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research, 10:323-352, 1999.
9. O. Arieli and M. Denecker. Reducing preferential paraconsistent reasoning to classical entailment. Journal of Logic and Computation, 13(4):557-580, 2003.
10. P. Besnard and S. Doutre. Checking the acceptability of a set of arguments. In Proc. NMR'04, pages 59-64, 2004.
11. U. Egly, T. Eiter, H. Tompits, and S. Woltran. Solving advanced reasoning tasks using quantified boolean formulas. In Proc. AAAI'00, pages 417-422. AAAI Press/MIT Press, 2000.
12. T. Eiter, V. Klotz, H. Tompits, and S.Woltran. Modal nonmonotonic logics revisited: Efficient encodings for the basic reasoning tasks. In Proc. TABLEAUX'02, volume 2381 of LNCS, pages 100-114. Springer-Verlag, 2002.
13. H. Tompits and S. Woltran. Towards implementations for advanced equivalence checking in answer-set programming. In Proc. ICLP'05, volume 3668 of LNCS, pages 189-203. Springer-Verlag, 2005.
14. J. Katz, Z. Hanna, and N. Dershowitz. Space-efficient bounded model checking. In Proc. DATE'05, pages 686-687. IEEE Computer Society, 2005.
15. A. C. Ling, D. P. Singh, and S. D. Brown. FPGA logic synthesis using quantified boolean satisfiability. In Proc. SAT'05, volume 3569 of LNCS, pages 444-450. Springer, 2005.
16. U. Egly, R. Pichler, and S. Woltran. On deciding subsumption problems. Annals of Mathematics and Artificial Intelligence, 43(1-4):255-294, 2005.
17. D. Le Berre, M. Narizzano, L. Simon, and A. Tacchella. The second QBF solvers comparative evaluation. In Proc. SAT'04, volume 3542 of LNCS, pages 376-392. Springer, 2005.
18. C. Wrathall. Complete Sets and the Polynomial-Time Hierarchy. Theoretical Computer Science, 3(1):23-33, 1976.
19. U. Egly, M. Seidl, H. Tompits, S. Woltran, and M. Zolda. Comparing different prenexing strategies for quantified boolean formulas. In Proc. SAT'03. Selected Revised Papers, volume 2919 of LNCS, pages 214-228, 2004.
20. U. Egly, M. Seidl, and S. Woltran. A solver for QBFs in nonprenex form. Accepted for publication in Proc. ECAI'06, 2006.
21. Y. Dimopoulos, B. Nebel, and F. Toni. Preferred arguments are harder to compute than stable extension. In Proc. IJCAI'99), pages 36-43. Morgan Kaufmann Publishers, 1999.
22. P. E. Dunne and T. J. M. Bench-Capon. Coherence in finite argument systems. Artificial Intelligence, 141(1/2):187-203, 2002.
23. S. Doutre and J. Mengin. Preferred extensions of argumentation frameworks: Query answering and computation. In Proc. IJCAR'01, pages 272-288. volume 2083 of LNAI, pages 272-288. Springer, 2001.
24. D. Poole. A logical framework for default reasoning. Artificial Intelligence, 36(1):270-48, 1988.
25. T. Eiter and G. Gottlob. Complexity of reasoning with parsimonious and moderately grounded expansions. Fundamenta Informaticae, 17(1-2):31-53, 1992.
26. M. Ghasemzadeh, V. Klotz, and C. Meinel. Embedding memoization to the semantic tree search for deciding QBFs. In Proc. AI 2004, volume 3339 of LNCS, pages 681-693, 2004.
27. E. Giunchiglia, M. Narizzano, and A. Tacchella. Quantifier structure in search based procedures for QBFs. In Proc. DATE'06, 2006.