Non-Admissibility in Abstract Argumentation

  • Wolfgang Dvorák*
  • , Tjitze Rienstra
  • , Leendert van der Torre
  • , Stefan Woltran
  • *Corresponding author for this work

Research output: Chapter in Book/Report/Conference proceedingChapterAcademic

Abstract

In this paper, we give an overview of several recent proposals for non-Admissible non-naive semantics for abstract argumentation frameworks. We highlight the similarities and differences between weak admissibility-based approaches and undecidedness-blocking approaches using examples and principles as well as a study of their computational complexity. We introduce a kind of strengthened undecidedness-blocking semantics combining some of the distinctive behaviours of weak admissibility-based semantics with the lower complexity of undecidedness-blocking approaches. We call it loop semantics, because in our new semantics, an argument can only be undecided if it is part of a loop of undecided arguments. Our paper shows how a principle-based approach and a complexity-based approach can be used in tandem to further develop the foundations of formal argumentation.

Original languageEnglish
Title of host publicationComputational Models of Argument - Proceedings of COMMA 2022
EditorsFrancesca Toni, Sylwia Polberg, Richard Booth, Martin Caminada, Hiroyuki Kido
Pages128-139
Number of pages12
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 7 Sept 2022
EventComputational Models of Argument - Cardiff University, Cardiff, United Kingdom
Duration: 14 Sept 202216 Sept 2022
https://comma.csc.liv.ac.uk/node/31#:~:text=COMMA%202022%20will%20be%20held,University%20in%20Wales%2C%20United%20Kingdom.&text=In%20addition%20to%20the%20main,on%20current%20topics%20of%20argumentation.

Publication series

SeriesFrontiers in Artificial Intelligence and Applications
Volume353
ISSN0922-6389

Conference

ConferenceComputational Models of Argument
Abbreviated titleCOMMA 2022
Country/TerritoryUnited Kingdom
CityCardiff
Period14/09/2216/09/22
Internet address

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'Non-Admissibility in Abstract Argumentation'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this