1 / 29

Argumentation Logics Lecture 3: Abstract argumentation preferred semantics

Argumentation Logics Lecture 3: Abstract argumentation preferred semantics. Henry Prakken Chongqing May 29, 2010. Contents. Review of stable semantics Definitions A problem Preferred semantics Labelling-based Extension-based Abstract argumentation: general remarks on semantics.

manchu
Download Presentation

Argumentation Logics Lecture 3: Abstract argumentation preferred semantics

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Argumentation LogicsLecture 3:Abstract argumentationpreferred semantics Henry Prakken Chongqing May 29, 2010

  2. Contents Review of stable semantics Definitions A problem Preferred semantics Labelling-based Extension-based Abstract argumentation: general remarks on semantics

  3. Status of arguments: abstract semantics (Dung 1995) • INPUT: an abstract argumentation theoryAAT = Args,Defeat • OUTPUT: An assignment of the status ‘in’ or ‘out’ to all members of Args • So: semantics specifies conditions for labeling the ‘argument graph’. • Should capture reinstatement: A B C

  4. Possible labeling conditions • Every argument is either ‘in’ or ‘out’. 1. An argument is ‘in’ iff all arguments defeating it are ‘out’. 2. An argument is ‘out’ iff it is defeated by an argument that is ‘in’. • Works fine with: • But not with: A B C A B

  5. Two solutions • Change conditions so that always a unique status assignment results • Use multiple status assignments: • and A B C A B A B C A B A B

  6. A problem(?) with grounded semantics We have: We want(?): A B A B C C D D

  7. Multiple labellings A B A B C C D D

  8. Stable status assignments (Below is AAT = Args,Defeat implicit) A stable status assignmentis a partition of Args into sets In and Out such that: 1. An argument is in In iff all arguments defeating it are in Out. 2. An argument is in Out iff it is defeated by an argument that is in In. A is justified if A is Inin all s.a. A is overruled if A is Out in all s.a. A is defensible if A is Inin some but not all s.a.

  9. Stable extensions Dung (1995): S is conflict-free if no member of S defeats a member of S S is a stable extension if it is conflict-free and defeats all arguments outside it Now: S is a stable argument extension if (In,Out) is a stable status assignment and S = In. Proposition 4.3.4: S is a stable argument extension iff S is a stable extension

  10. Stable status assignments:a problem A stable status assignmentis a partition of Args into sets In and Out such that: 1. An argument is in In iff all arguments defeating it are in Out. 2. An argument is in Out iff it is defeated by an argument that is in In. A B C

  11. Stable status assignments:a problem A stable status assignmentis a partition of Args into sets In and Out such that: 1. An argument is in In iff all arguments defeating it are in Out. 2. An argument is in Out iff it is defeated by an argument that is in In. A B C

  12. Stable status assignments:a problem A stable status assignmentis a partition of Args into sets In and Out such that: 1. An argument is in In iff all arguments defeating it are in Out. 2. An argument is in Out iff it is defeated by an argument that is in In. A B C

  13. Stable status assignments:a problem A stable status assignmentis a partition of Args into sets In and Out such that: 1. An argument is in In iff all arguments defeating it are in Out. 2. An argument is in Out iff it is defeated by an argument that is in In. A B C

  14. Stable status assignments:a problem A stable status assignmentis a partition of Args into sets In and Out such that: 1. An argument is in In iff all arguments defeating it are in Out. 2. An argument is in Out iff it is defeated by an argument that is in In. A B C

  15. Status assignments A status assignment assigns to zero or more members of Args either the status In or Out (but not both) such that: 1. An argument is in In iff all arguments defeating it are in Out. 2. An argument is in Out iff it is defeated by an argument that is in In. Let Undecided = Args / (InOut): A status assignment is stable if Undecided = . In is a stable argument extension A status assignment is preferred if Undecided is -minimal. In is a preferred argument extension A status assignment is grounded if Undecided is -maximal. In is the grounded argument extension

  16. 1. An argument is In iff all arguments defeating it are Out. 2. An argument is Out iff it is defeated by an argument that is In. Grounded s.a. minimise node colouring Preferred s.a maximise node colouring A B E D C

  17. Preferred extensions Dung (1995): S is conflict-free if no member of S defeats a member of S S is admissible if it is conflict-free and all its members are acceptable wrt S S is a preferred extension if it is -maximally admissible Recall: S is a preferred (grounded) argument extension if (In,Out) is a preferred (grounded) status assignment and S = In. Proposition 4.3.13(16): S is a preferred (grounded) argument extension iff S is a preferred (grounded) extension

  18. S defends A if all defeaters of A are defeated by a member of S S is admissible if it is conflict-free and defends all its members A B E D C Admissible?

  19. S defends A if all defeaters of A are defeated by a member of S S is admissible if it is conflict-free and defends all its members A B E D C Admissible?

  20. S defends A if all defeaters of A are defeated by a member of S S is admissible if it is conflict-free and defends all its members A B E D C Admissible?

  21. S defends A if all defeaters of A are defeated by a member of S S is admissible if it is conflict-free and defends all its members A B E D C Admissible?

  22. S defends A if all defeaters of A are defeated by a member of S S is admissible if it is conflict-free and defends all its members A B E D C S is preferred if it is maximally admissible Preferred?

  23. S defends A if all defeaters of A are defeated by a member of S S is admissible if it is conflict-free and defends all its members A B E D C S is preferred if it is maximally admissible Preferred?

  24. S defends A if all defeaters of A are defeated by a member of S S is admissible if it is conflict-free and defends all its members A B E D C S is preferred if it is maximally admissible Preferred?

  25. S defends A if all defeaters of A are defeated by a member of S S is admissible if it is conflict-free and defends all its members A B E D C S is groundeded if it is the smallest set s.t. A  S iff S defends A Grounded?

  26. S defends A if all defeaters of A are defeated by a member of S S is admissible if it is conflict-free and defends all its members A B E D C S is groundeded if it is the smallest set s.t. A  S iff S defends A Grounded?

  27. 1. An argument is In if all arguments defeating it are Out. 2. An argument is Out if it is defeated by an argument that is In. A B F E D C

  28. Properties Every admissible set is included in a preferred extension The grounded extension is unique Every stable extension is preferred (but not v.v.) There exists at least one preferred extension The grounded extension is a subset of all preferred and stable extensions Every AAT without infinite defeat paths has a unique extension (which is the same in all semantics) Every AAT without odd defeat cycles has a stable extension ...

  29. Self-defeating arguments again • Recall: • A is justified if A is Inin all s/p/g.s.a. • A is overruled if A is Out in all s/p/g.s.a. • A is defensible if A is Inin some but not in all s/p/g.s.a. • In grounded and preferred semantics self-defeating arguments are not always overruled • They can make that there are no stable extensions

More Related