Limits and Possibilities of Forgetting in Abstract Argumentation

Cao, Rui; Naumov, Pavel

doi:10.24963/ijcai.2022/352

Cited by 7 publications

(8 citation statements)

References 15 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…One future line of research is to explore how forgetting translates to other formalisms, as has been done for abstract argumentation (Baumann and Berthold 2022). Another one is to investigate forgetting from logic programs with variables.…”

Section: Conclusion and Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

On Syntactic Forgetting with Strong Persistence

Berthold

2022

Proceedings of the Nineteenth International Conference on Principles of Knowledge Representation and Reasoning

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

It is generally agreed upon that so-called strong persistence (SP) captures best the essence of forgetting in logic programming. While classes of operators, such as F_R and F_SP, that satisfy immediate relaxations of (SP), and in the case of F_SP, even (SP) whenever possible, have been characterized semantically, many practical questions have yet to be addressed. This technical paper aims to answer one of them: How can atoms be forgotten from a program without having to calculate its exponential number of models? To this end, we introduce two concrete representatives of F_R and F_SP that forget sets of atoms by syntactical manipulation of a program’s rules. This may in many cases prevent exponential blowups and produce a forgetting result that is close to the original program.

show abstract

Section: Conclusion and Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

On Syntactic Forgetting with Strong Persistence

Berthold

2022

Proceedings of the Nineteenth International Conference on Principles of Knowledge Representation and Reasoning

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Yet another aspect of dialectical strength is to what extent it is possible to change the current contextual strength of the argument by moving to a new state. This aspect is arguably formalised by formal work on the dynamics of argumentation, in particular on so-called preservation, realisability and enforcement properties [8,15]. Preservation is about the extent to which the current contextual status of arguments is preserved under change, while realisability and enforcement concern the extent to which particular outcomes can or will be obtained by changing the current state.…”

Section: Logical Dialectical and Rhetorical Argument Strengthmentioning

confidence: 99%

Philosophical Reflections on Argument Strength and Gradual Acceptability

Prakken

2021

Lecture Notes in Computer Science

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This paper proposes a classification of three aspects of argument strength based on philosophical insights, in particular Aristotle's distinction between logic, dialectic and rhetoric. It is then argued that when developing or evaluating gradual accounts of argument strength it is essential to be explicit about which aspect of argument strength is modelled and about the adopted interpretation of the arguments and their relations in abstract or bipolar argumentation frameworks. The underlying aim is to encourage a principled development and evaluation of (principles for) gradual argumentation semantics.

show abstract

“…While strong equivalence is about comparing the behavior of different knowledge bases, the enforcement problem (Baumann, 2012b;Wallner, Niskanen, & Järvisalo, 2017;Borg & Bex, 2021) deals with manipulating a single one in order to ensure a certain outcome. Research concerned with this issue contributes to predict conceivable future scenarios and possible outcomes of a debate and can serve as a guidance when trying to defend a certain point of view.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Both strong equivalence and enforcement have received increasing attention in the realm of abstract argumentation (Baumann, 2012b;Baumann, Rapberger, & Ulbricht, 2022;Oikarinen & Woltran, 2011). There are, however, only few studies on the aforementioned problems in structured argumentation.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…While for abstract argumentation, deciding strong equivalence as well as the basic argument enforcement (Baumann, 2012b) is tractable, it is not clear whether, and if so, how these results survive the transition to structured argumentation formalisms. At first glance it seems that we can rely on well-established methods: As we already mentioned, we can construct arguments from a structured argumentation formalism like ABA (Caminada, Sá, Alcântara, & Dvořák, 2015a) or logic-based argumentation (Gorogiannis & Hunter, 2011).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

On Dynamics in Structured Argumentation Formalisms

Rapberger

Ulbricht

2023

jair

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This paper is a contribution to the research on dynamics in assumption-based argumentation (ABA). We investigate situations where a given knowledge base undergoes certain changes. We show that two frequently investigated problems, namely enforcement of a given target atom and deciding strong equivalence of two given ABA frameworks, are intractable in general. Notably, these problems are both tractable for abstract argumentation frameworks (AFs) which admit a close correspondence to ABA by constructing semanticspreserving instances. Inspired by this observation, we search for tractable fragments for ABA frameworks by means of the instantiated AFs. We argue that the usual instantiation procedure is not suitable for the investigation of dynamic scenarios since too much information is lost when constructing the abstract framework. We thus consider an extension of AFs, called cvAFs, equipping arguments with conclusions and vulnerabilities in order to better anticipate their role after the underlying knowledge base is extended. We investigate enforcement and strong equivalence for cvAFs and present syntactic conditions to decide them. We show that the correspondence between cvAFs and ABA frameworks is close enough to capture dynamics in ABA. This yields the desired tractable fragment. We furthermore discuss consequences for the corresponding problems for logic programs.

show abstract

Limits and Possibilities of Forgetting in Abstract Argumentation

Cited by 7 publications

References 15 publications

On Syntactic Forgetting with Strong Persistence

On Syntactic Forgetting with Strong Persistence

Philosophical Reflections on Argument Strength and Gradual Acceptability

On Dynamics in Structured Argumentation Formalisms

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About