Copyright and Licensing
Articles accepted for publication will be licensed under the Creative Commons BY-NC-SA. Authors must sign a non-exclusive distribution agreement after article acceptance.
An approach for Temporal Argumentation Using Labeled Defeasible Logic Programming (l-DeLP)
Keywords:
Argumentation, Temporal Availability, Defeasible Logic Programming, Labeled Defeasible Logic ProgrammingAbstract
In the last decade, several argument-based formalisms have emerged, with application in many areas, such as legal reasoning, autonomous agents and multi-agent systems; many are based on Dung’s seminal work characterizing Abstract Argumentation Frameworks (AF). Recent research in the area has led to Temporal Argumentation Frameworks (TAF), that extend AF by considering the temporal availability of arguments. On the other hand, different more concrete argumentation systems exists, such as Defeasible Logic Programming (DeLP), specifying a knowledge representation language, and how arguments are built. In this work we combine time representation capabilities of TAF with the representation language and argument structure of DeLP, defining a rule-based argumentation framework that considers time at the object language level. In order to do this, we use an extension of DeLP, called Labeled DeLP (l-DeLP) to establish, for each program clause, the set of time intervals in which it is available, and to determine from this information the temporal availability of arguments. Acceptability semantics for TAF can then be applied to determine argument acceptability on time
Downloads
Download data is not yet available.
References
[1] Leila Amgoud and Caroline Devred. Argumentation frameworks as constraint satisfaction problems. In Salem Benferhat and John Grant, editors, SUM, volume 6929 of Lecture Notes in Computer Science, pages 110–122. Springer, 2011.
[2] Gerhard Brewka, Paul E. Dunne, and Stefan Woltran. Relating the semantics of abstract dialectical frameworks and standard afs. In Toby Walsh, editor, IJCAI, pages 780–785. IJCAI/AAAI, 2011.
[3] Gerhard Brewka and Stefan Woltran. Abstract dialectical frameworks. In Fangzhen Lin, Ulrike Sattler, and Miroslaw Truszczynski, editors, KR. AAAI Press, 2010.
[4] Martin Caminada and Gabriella Pigozzi. On judgment aggregation in abstract argumentation. Autonomous Agents and Multi-Agent Systems, 22(1):64–102, 2011.
[5] Maria Laura Cobo, Diego C. Martı́nez, and Guillermo R. Simari. On admissibility in timed abstract argumentation frameworks. In Helder Coelho, Rudi Studer, and Michael Wooldridge, editors, ECAI, volume 215 of Frontiers in Artificial Intelligence and Applications, pages 1007–1008. IOS Press, 2010.
[6] Maria Laura Cobo, Diego C. Martı́nez, and Guillermo R. Simari. Acceptability in timed frameworks with intermittent arguments. In Lazaros S. Iliadis, Ilias Maglogiannis, and Harris Papadopoulos, editors, EANN/AIAI (2), volume 364 of IFIP Publications, pages 202–211. Springer, 2011.
[7] Phan M. Dung. On the acceptability of arguments and its fundamental role in nonmonotonic reasoning and logic programming and n-person games. Artificial Intelligence, 77:321–357, 1995.
[8] Alejandro J. Garcı́a and Guillermo R. Simari. Defeasible logic programming: An argumentative approach. Theory Practice of Logic Programming, 4(1):95–138, 2004.
[9] M. Gómez Lucero, C. Chesñevar, G. Simari, and A. Garcı́a. Extensión de la argumentación rebatible para considerar etiquetas. VIII Workshop de Investigadores en Ciencias de la Computación, pages 189–193, 2006.
[10] H. Prakken. An abstract framework for argumentation with structured arguments. Argument and Computation, 1:93–124, 2010.
[2] Gerhard Brewka, Paul E. Dunne, and Stefan Woltran. Relating the semantics of abstract dialectical frameworks and standard afs. In Toby Walsh, editor, IJCAI, pages 780–785. IJCAI/AAAI, 2011.
[3] Gerhard Brewka and Stefan Woltran. Abstract dialectical frameworks. In Fangzhen Lin, Ulrike Sattler, and Miroslaw Truszczynski, editors, KR. AAAI Press, 2010.
[4] Martin Caminada and Gabriella Pigozzi. On judgment aggregation in abstract argumentation. Autonomous Agents and Multi-Agent Systems, 22(1):64–102, 2011.
[5] Maria Laura Cobo, Diego C. Martı́nez, and Guillermo R. Simari. On admissibility in timed abstract argumentation frameworks. In Helder Coelho, Rudi Studer, and Michael Wooldridge, editors, ECAI, volume 215 of Frontiers in Artificial Intelligence and Applications, pages 1007–1008. IOS Press, 2010.
[6] Maria Laura Cobo, Diego C. Martı́nez, and Guillermo R. Simari. Acceptability in timed frameworks with intermittent arguments. In Lazaros S. Iliadis, Ilias Maglogiannis, and Harris Papadopoulos, editors, EANN/AIAI (2), volume 364 of IFIP Publications, pages 202–211. Springer, 2011.
[7] Phan M. Dung. On the acceptability of arguments and its fundamental role in nonmonotonic reasoning and logic programming and n-person games. Artificial Intelligence, 77:321–357, 1995.
[8] Alejandro J. Garcı́a and Guillermo R. Simari. Defeasible logic programming: An argumentative approach. Theory Practice of Logic Programming, 4(1):95–138, 2004.
[9] M. Gómez Lucero, C. Chesñevar, G. Simari, and A. Garcı́a. Extensión de la argumentación rebatible para considerar etiquetas. VIII Workshop de Investigadores en Ciencias de la Computación, pages 189–193, 2006.
[10] H. Prakken. An abstract framework for argumentation with structured arguments. Argument and Computation, 1:93–124, 2010.
Downloads
Published
2012-08-01
How to Cite
Budán, M. C. D., Gómez Lucero, M. J., & Simari, G. R. (2012). An approach for Temporal Argumentation Using Labeled Defeasible Logic Programming (l-DeLP). Journal of Computer Science and Technology, 12(02), p. 56–63. Retrieved from https://journal.info.unlp.edu.ar/JCST/article/view/653
Issue
Section
Original Articles
