LOGIN TO YOUR ACCOUNT

Username
Password
Remember Me
Or use your Academic/Social account:

CREATE AN ACCOUNT

Or use your Academic/Social account:

Congratulations!

You have just completed your registration at OpenAire.

Before you can login to the site, you will need to activate your account. An e-mail will be sent to you with the proper instructions.

Important!

Please note that this site is currently undergoing Beta testing.
Any new content you create is not guaranteed to be present to the final version of the site upon release.

Thank you for your patience,
OpenAire Dev Team.

Close This Message

CREATE AN ACCOUNT

Name:
Username:
Password:
Verify Password:
E-mail:
Verify E-mail:
*All Fields Are Required.
Please Verify You Are Human:
fbtwitterlinkedinvimeoflicker grey 14rssslideshare1
van Gijzel, Bas; Nilsson, Henrik (2014)
Publisher: IOS Press
Languages: English
Types: Article
Subjects:
Argumentation theory combines philosophical concepts and computational models to deliver a practical approach to reasoning that handles uncertain information and possibly conflicting viewpoints. This paper focuses on the structured approach to argumentation that incorporates domain specific knowledge and argumentation schemes. There is a lack of implementations and implementation methods for most structured models. This paper shows how taking a principled approach, using the programming language Haskell, helps addressing this problem. We construct a framework for developing structured argumentation models and translations between models (given intertranslatability of models). We furthermore provide a methodology to quickly test and formally prove desirable properties of such implementations using a theorem prover. We demonstrate our approach on the Carneades argumentation model and Dung's abstract argumentation frameworks, implementing both the models and a translation from Carneades into AFs. We then provide implementations of correspondence properties and an initial formalisation of Dung's AFs into a theorem prover. The final result is a verified pipeline from the structured model Carneades into existing efficient SAT-based implementations of Dung's AFs.
  • The results below are discovered through our pilot algorithms. Let us know how we are doing!

    • [1] Gerhard Brewka, Paul E. Dunne, and Stefan Woltran. Relating the semantics of abstract dialectical frameworks and standard AFs. In Proceedings of the 22nd International Joint Conference on Arti cial Intelligence (IJCAI-11), pages 780{785, 2011.
    • [2] Gerhard Brewka and Thomas F. Gordon. Carneades and abstract dialectical frameworks: A reconstruction. In Massimiliano Giacomin and Guillermo R. Simari, editors, Computational Models of Argument. Proceedings of COMMA 2010, pages 3{12, Amsterdam etc, 2010. IOS Press 2010.
    • [3] Federico Cerutti, Paul Dunne, Massimiliano Giacomin, and Mauro Vallati. A SAT-based approach for computing extensions in abstract argumentation. In 2nd International Workshop on Theory and Applications of Formal Argumentation (TAFA-13). Springer, 2013.
    • [4] Gunther Charwat, Johannes Peter Wallner, and Stefan Woltran. Utilizing ASP for generating and visualizing argumentation frameworks. CoRR, abs/1301.1388, 2013.
    • [5] Koen Claessen and John Hughes. Quickcheck: a lightweight tool for random testing of haskell programs. Acm sigplan notices, 46(4):53{64, 2011.
    • [6] Phan Minh Dung. On the acceptability of arguments and its fundamental role in nonmonotonic reasoning, logic programming and n-person games. Arti cial Intelligence, 77(2):321{ 357, 1995.
    • [7] Wolfgang Dvorak, Matti Jarvisalo, Johannes Peter Wallner, and Stefan Woltran. Complexity-sensitive decision procedures for abstract argumentation. Arti cial Intelligence, 206:53{78, 2014.
    • [8] Dorian Gaertner and Francesca Toni. Computing arguments and attacks in assumptionbased argumentation. IEEE Intelligent Systems, 22(6):24{33, November 2007.
    • [9] Bas van Gijzel and Henrik Nilsson. Haskell gets argumentative. In Proceedings of the Symposium on Trends in Functional Programming (TFP 2012), LNCS 7829, pages 215{ 230, St Andrews, UK, 2013. LNCS.
    • [10] Bas van Gijzel and Henrik Nilsson. Towards a framework for the implementation and veri cation of translations between argumentation models. In Accepted for Post Proceedings of the 25th symposium on Implementation and Application of Functional Languages (IFL 2013), 2014.
    • [11] Bas van Gijzel and Henry Prakken. Relating Carneades with abstract argumentation via the ASPIC+ framework for structured argumentation. Argument & Computation, 3(1):21{47, 2012.
    • [12] Thomas F. Gordon and Douglas Walton. Proof burdens and standards. In Guillermo Simari and Iyad Rahwan, editors, Argumentation in Arti cial Intelligence, pages 239{258. Springer US, 2009.
    • [13] Sanjay Modgil and Henry Prakken. A general account of argumentation with preferences. Arti cial Intelligence, 195:361{397, 2013.
    • [14] Victor Noel and Antonis Kakas. Gorgias-c: Extending argumentation with constraint solving. In Esra Erdem, Fangzhen Lin, and Torsten Schaub, editors, Logic Programming and Nonmonotonic Reasoning, volume 5753 of Lecture Notes in Computer Science, pages 535{541. Springer Berlin Heidelberg, 2009.
    • [15] Henry Prakken. An abstract framework for argumentation with structured arguments. Argument & Computation, 1:93{124, 2010.
  • No related research data.
  • Discovered through pilot similarity algorithms. Send us your feedback.

Share - Bookmark

Cite this article