Abstract
In this paper, we investigate the revision issue for Dung argumentation frameworks. The main idea is that such frameworks can be translated into propositional formulae, allowing the use of propositional revision operators to perform a rational minimal change. Our translation-based approach to revising argumentation frameworks can take advantage of any propositional revision operator ∘. Via a translation, each propositional operator ∘ can be associated with some revision operators ⋆ suited to argumentation frameworks. Some rationality postulates for the ⋆ operators are presented. If the revision formulae are restricted to formulae about acceptance statuses, some ⋆ operators satisfy these postulates provided that the corresponding ∘ operator is AGM.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Preview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
References
Alchourrón, C.E., Gärdenfors, P., Makinson, D.: On the logic of theory change: Partial meet contraction and revision functions. Journal of Symbolic Logic 50, 510–530 (1985)
Baumann, R.: What does it take to enforce an argument? minimal change in abstract argumentation. In: Proceedings of the European Conference on Artificial Intelligence (ECAI 2012), pp. 127–132 (2012)
Baumann, R., Brewka, G.: Expanding argumentation frameworks: Enforcing and monotonicity results. In: Proceedings of the Third International Conference on Computational Models of Argument (COMMA 2010), pp. 75–186 (2010)
Besnard, P., Doutre, S.: Checking the acceptability of a set of arguments. In: Proceedings of the 10th International Workshop on Non-Monotonic Reasoning (NMR 2004), pp. 59–64 (2004)
Besnard, P., Doutre, S., Herzig, A.: Encoding Argument Graphs in Logic. In: Laurent, A., Strauss, O., Bouchon-Meunier, B., Yager, R.R. (eds.) IPMU 2014, Part II. CCIS, vol. 443, pp. 345–354. Springer, Heidelberg (2014)
Bisquert, P., Cayrol, C., de Saint-Cyr, F.D., Lagasquie-Schiex, M.-C.: Change in argumentation systems: Exploring the interest of removing an argument. In: Benferhat, S., Grant, J. (eds.) SUM 2011. LNCS, vol. 6929, pp. 275–288. Springer, Heidelberg (2011)
Bisquert, P., Cayrol, C., de Saint-Cyr, F.D., Lagasquie-Schiex, M.-C.: Enforcement in argumentation is a kind of update. In: Liu, W., Subrahmanian, V.S., Wijsen, J. (eds.) SUM 2013. LNCS, vol. 8078, pp. 30–43. Springer, Heidelberg (2013)
Boella, G., Kaci, S., van der Torre, L.: Dynamics in argumentation with single extensions: Abstraction principles and the grounded extension. In: Sossai, C., Chemello, G. (eds.) ECSQARU 2009. LNCS, vol. 5590, pp. 107–118. Springer, Heidelberg (2009)
Boella, G., Kaci, S., van der Torre, L.: Dynamics in argumentation with single extensions: attack refinement and the grounded extension. In: Proceedings of the International Conference on Autonomous Agents and Multiagents Systems (AAMAS 2009), pp. 1213–1214 (2009)
Booth, R., Kaci, S., Rienstra, T., van der Torre, L.: A logical theory about dynamics in abstract argumentation. In: Liu, W., Subrahmanian, V.S., Wijsen, J. (eds.) SUM 2013. LNCS, vol. 8078, pp. 148–161. Springer, Heidelberg (2013)
Cayrol, C., de Saint-Cyr, F.D., Lagasquie-Schiex, M.C.: Change in abstract argumentation frameworks: Adding an argument. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 38, 49–84 (2010)
Cojan, J., Lieber, J.: Belief revision-based case-based reasoning. In: Richard, G. (ed.) ECAI 2012 Workshop Similarity and Analogy-Based Methods in AI, Montpellier, France, pp. 33–39 (2012)
Coste-Marquis, S., Konieczny, S., Mailly, J.G., Marquis, P.: On the revision of argumentation systems: Minimal change of arguments statuses. In: 14th International Conference on Principles of Knowledge Representation and Reasoning (KR 2014), Vienna, July 2014 (to appear)
Dalal, M.: Investigations into a theory of knowledge base revision: Preliminary report. In: Proceedings of the Seventh National Conference on Artificial Intelligence (AAAI 1988), pp. 475–479 (1988)
Doutre, S., Herzig, A., Perrussel, L.: A dynamic logic framework for abstract argumentation. In: Proceedings of the 14th International Conference on Principles of Knowledge Representation and Reasoning (KR 2014), pp. 62–71 (2014)
Doutre, S., Perrussel, L.: On Enforcing a Constraint in Argumentation. In: 11th European Workshop on Multi-Agent Systems, EUMAS 2013, Toulouse (2013)
Dung, P.M.: On the acceptability of arguments and its fundamental role in nonmonotonic reasoning, logic programming, and n-person games. Artificial Intelligence 77(2), 321–357 (1995)
Gabbay, D., Rodrigues, O., Russo, A.: Revision by translation. In: Proceedings of the Seventh International Conference on Information Processing and Management of Uncertainty in Knowledge-Based Systems (IPMU 1998). Information, Uncertainty and Fusion, pp. 3–32 (1998)
Grove, A.: Two modellings for theory change. Journal of Philosophical Logic 17, 157–170 (1988)
Hamming, R.W.: Error detecting and error correcting codes. Bell System Technical Journal 29(2), 147–160 (1950)
Katsuno, H., Mendelzon, A.O.: Propositional knowledge base revision and minimal change. Artificial Intelligence 52, 263–294 (1991)
Nieves, J., Osorio, M., Corts, U.: Inferring preferred extensions by minimal models. In: Workshop on Argumentation and Non-Monotonic Reasoning, Workshop at Logic Programming and Non-Monotonic Reasonning 2007 (LPNMR 2007), pp. 114–124 (2007)
Nofal, S., Atkinson, K., Dunne, P.: Algorithms for decision problems in argument systems under preferred semantics. Artificial Intelligence 207, 23–51 (2014)
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2014 Springer International Publishing Switzerland
About this paper
Cite this paper
Coste-Marquis, S., Konieczny, S., Mailly, JG., Marquis, P. (2014). A Translation-Based Approach for Revision of Argumentation Frameworks. In: Fermé, E., Leite, J. (eds) Logics in Artificial Intelligence. JELIA 2014. Lecture Notes in Computer Science(), vol 8761. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-11558-0_28
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-11558-0_28
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-319-11557-3
Online ISBN: 978-3-319-11558-0
eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)