On the Acceptability of Incompatible Arguments

Authors:
Souhila Kaci;Leendert Torre;Emil Weydert
Affiliations:
CRIL, Lens Cedex, France 62307;Computer Science and Communication, University of Luxembourg, Luxembourg,;Computer Science and Communication, University of Luxembourg, Luxembourg,
Venue:
ECSQARU '07 Proceedings of the 9th European Conference on Symbolic and Quantitative Approaches to Reasoning with Uncertainty
Year:
2007

Citing 9
Cited 3

A mathematical treatment of defeasible reasoning and its implementation

Artificial Intelligence
On the acceptability of arguments and its fundamental role in nonmonotonic reasoning, logic programming and n-person games

Artificial Intelligence
A logic-based theory of deductive arguments

Artificial Intelligence
A Reasoning Model Based on the Production of Acceptable Arguments

Annals of Mathematics and Artificial Intelligence
Inferring from Inconsistency in Preference-Based Argumentation Frameworks

Journal of Automated Reasoning
Comparing Arguments Using Preference Orderings for Argument-Based Reasoning

ICTAI '96 Proceedings of the 8th International Conference on Tools with Artificial Intelligence
Acyclic Argumentation: Attack = Conflict + Preference

Proceedings of the 2006 conference on ECAI 2006: 17th European Conference on Artificial Intelligence August 29 -- September 1, 2006, Riva del Garda, Italy
Propositional argumentation and causal reasoning

IJCAI'05 Proceedings of the 19th international joint conference on Artificial intelligence
Symmetric argumentation frameworks

ECSQARU'05 Proceedings of the 8th European conference on Symbolic and Quantitative Approaches to Reasoning with Uncertainty

Social Viewpoints for Arguing about Coalitions

PRIMA '08 Proceedings of the 11th Pacific Rim International Conference on Multi-Agents: Intelligent Agents and Multi-Agent Systems
An Argumentative Approach for Modelling Coalitions Using ATL

Argumentation in Multi-Agent Systems
A logic of argumentation for specification and verification of abstract argumentation frameworks

Annals of Mathematics and Artificial Intelligence

Quantified Score

Hi-index	0.00

Visualization

Abstract

In this paper we study the acceptability of incompatible arguments within Dung's abstract argumentation framework. As an example we introduce an instance of Dung's framework where arguments are represented by propositional formulas and an argument attacks another one when the conjunction of their representations is inconsistent, which we characterize as a kind of symmetric attack. Since symmetric attack is known to have the drawback to collapse the various argumentation semantics, we consider also two variations. First, we consider propositional arguments distinguishing support and conclusion. Second, we introduce a preference ordering over the arguments and we define the attack relation in terms of a symmetric incompatibility relation and the preference relation. We show how to characterize preference-based argumentation using a kind of acyclic attack relation.