More Web Proxy on the site http://driver.im/

research-article

A Mathematical Conceptualization of Bundle Sets in Defeasible Logic Programming

Authors:

Yamil Osvaldo Soto,

Cristhian Ariel David Deagustini,

Maria Vanina Martinez,

Gerardo Ignacio SimariAuthors Info & Claims

SAC '24: Proceedings of the 39th ACM/SIGAPP Symposium on Applied Computing

Pages 779 - 786

https://doi.org/10.1145/3605098.3636042

Published: 21 May 2024 Publication History

Abstract

Defeasible Logic Programming (DeLP) is a formalism for structured argumentation-based reasoning that is founded on a dialectical procedure that relies on trees to compute answers to queries, which return the so-called warrant statuses of the literals involved. In this work, we propose a novel, more general, and minimal structure (understanding it as the minimum information necessary to warrant a statement) than the concept of dialectical tree, which we call parsimonious bundle set. This structure is significant for a line of research that we are carrying out in which we are studying the theoretical foundations of DeLP toward the definition of model-theoretic semantics, a contribution that, in turn, will allow us to analyze the formalism from a different perspective, focusing on theoretical aspects, and also to eventually generalize the query language from literals to formulas built from Boolean connectives. Therefore, in this first step, we focus on developing the basic tools required to provide an alternative to the operational semantics of DeLP that is centered on declarative definitions.

References

[1]

Pietro Baroni, Martin Caminada, and Massimiliano Giacomin. 2011. An introduction to argumentation semantics. Knowl. Eng. Rev. 26, 4 (2011), 365--410.

Digital Library

[2]

Pietro Baroni, Eduardo Fermé, Massimiliano Giacomin, and Guillermo Ricardo Simari. 2022. Belief Revision and Computational Argumentation: A Critical Comparison. J. Log. Lang. Inf. 31, 4 (2022), 555--589.

Digital Library

[3]

Martin Caminada and Leila Amgoud. 2007. On the evaluation of argumentation formalisms. Artif. Intell. 171, 5--6 (2007), 286--310.

Digital Library

[4]

Carlos Iván Chesñevar, Ramón F Brena, and José-Luis Aguirre. 2005. Knowledge Distribution in Large Organizations Using Defeasible Logic Programming. In Canadian Conference on AI. Springer, 244--256.

Digital Library

[5]

Carlos Iván Chesñevar and Guillermo Ricardo Simari. 2007. A Lattice-Based Approach to Computing Warranted Beliefs in Skeptical Argumentation Frameworks. In IJCAI 2007, Proceedings of the 20th International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence, Hyderabad, India, January 6--12, 2007, Manuela M. Veloso (Ed.). 280--285.

[6]

Carlos Iván Chesñevar, Guillermo Ricardo Simari, and Lluís Godo. 2005. Computing Dialectical Trees Efficiently in Possibilistic Defeasible Logic Programming. In Logic Programming and Nonmonotonic Reasoning, 8th International Conference, LPNMR 2005, Diamante, Italy, September 5--8, 2005, Proceedings (Lecture Notes in Computer Science, Vol. 3662), Chitta Baral, Gianluigi Greco, Nicola Leone, and Giorgio Terracina (Eds.). Springer, 158--171.

[7]

Boris Galitsky and Eugene William McKenna. 2017. Sentiment extraction from consumer reviews for providing product recommendations. US Patent 9,646,078.

[8]

Alejandro Javier García and Guillermo Ricardo Simari. 2004. Defeasible Logic Programming: An Argumentative Approach. Theory Pract. Log. Program. 4, 1--2 (2004), 95--138.

Digital Library

[9]

Alejandro Javier García and Guillermo Ricardo Simari. 2014. Defeasible logic programming: DeLP-servers, contextual queries, and explanations for answers. Argument Comput. 5, 1 (2014), 63--88.

[10]

Pascal Hitzler and Anthony Karel Seda. 2011. Mathematical Aspects of Logic Programming Semantics. CRC Press.

[11]

Robert Koons. 2022. Defeasible Reasoning. In The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (Summer 2022 ed.), Edward N. Zalta (Ed.). Metaphysics Research Lab, Stanford University.

[12]

Mario A. Leiva, Alejandro Javier García, Paulo Shakarian, and Gerardo I. Simari. 2022. Argumentation-Based Query Answering under Uncertainty with Application to Cybersecurity. Big Data Cogn. Comput. 6, 3 (2022), 91.

[13]

Alejandro J. García Marcelo A. Falappa and Guillermo R. Simari. 2023. Merging operators on stratified belief bases equipped with argumentative inference. Journal of Applied Non-Classical Logics 33, 3--4 (2023), 387--420.

[14]

Maria Vanina Martinez, Alejandro Javier García, and Guillermo Ricardo Simari. 2012. On the Use of Presumptions in Structured Defeasible Reasoning. In Computational Models of Argument - Proceedings of COMMA 2012, Vienna, Austria, September 10--12, 2012 (Frontiers in Artificial Intelligence and Applications, Vol. 245), Bart Verheij, Stefan Szeider, and Stefan Woltran (Eds.). IOS Press, 185--196.

[15]

Martín O. Moguillansky, Nicolás D. Rotstein, Marcelo A. Falappa, Alejandro Javier García, and Guillermo Ricardo Simari. 2013. Dynamics of knowledge in DeLP through Argument Theory Change. Theory Pract. Log. Program. 13, 6 (2013), 893--957.

[16]

Eric Nunes, Paulo Shakarian, and Gerardo I. Simari. 2018. At-risk system identification via analysis of discussions on the darkweb. In 2018 APWG Symposium on Electronic Crime Research, eCrime 2018, San Diego, CA, USA, May 15--17, 2018. IEEE, 1--12.

[17]

John L Pollock. 1987. Defeasible reasoning. Cogn. Sci. 11, 4 (1987), 481--518.

[18]

Henry Prakken. 2001. Relating protocols for dynamic dispute with logics for defeasible argumentation. Synthese 127, 1 (2001), 187--219.

[19]

Henry Prakken. 2005. Coherence and flexibility in dialogue games for argumentation. Journal of logic and computation 15, 6 (2005), 1009--1040.

Digital Library

[20]

Henry Prakken. 2023. Relating Abstract and Structured Accounts of Argumentation Dynamics: the Case of Expansions. In Proceedings of the 20th International Conference on Principles of Knowledge Representation and Reasoning, KR 2023, Rhodes, Greece, September 2--8, 2023, Pierre Marquis, Tran Cao Son, and Gabriele Kern-Isberner (Eds.). 562--571.

Digital Library

[21]

Guillermo R Simari and Ronald P Loui. 1992. A mathematical treatment of defeasible reasoning and its implementation. Artif. Intell. 53, 2--3 (1992), 125--157.

Digital Library

[22]

Frieder Stolzenburg, Alejandro J García, Carlos I Chesñevar, and Guillermo R Simari. 2003. Computing generalized specificity. J. Appl. Non-Class. Log. 13, 1 (2003), 87--113.

Cited By

Soto YDeagustini CMartinez MSimari G(2024)Towards a Dialogue Game-Based Semantics for Extended Abstract Argumentation Frameworks Based on Indecision-BlockingScalable Uncertainty Management10.1007/978-3-031-76235-2_33(445-460)Online publication date: 12-Nov-2024
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-76235-2_33

Index Terms

A Mathematical Conceptualization of Bundle Sets in Defeasible Logic Programming
1. Computing methodologies
  1. Artificial intelligence
    1. Knowledge representation and reasoning
      1. Nonmonotonic, default reasoning and belief revision

Recommendations

Extending a Defeasible Reasoner with Modal and Deontic Logic Operators
WI-IAT '08: Proceedings of the 2008 IEEE/WIC/ACM International Conference on Web Intelligence and Intelligent Agent Technology - Volume 03

Defeasible logic is a non-monotonic formalism that deals with incomplete and conflicting information. Modal logic deals with necessity and possibility, exhibiting defeasibility; thus, it is possible to combine defeasible logic with modal operators. This ...
Propositional defeasible logic has linear complexity

Defeasible logic is a rule-based nonmonotonic logic, with both strict and defeasible rules, and a priority relation on rules. We show that inference in the propositional form of the logic can be performed in linear time. This contrasts markedly with ...
Incremental computation of warranted arguments in dynamic defeasible argumentation: the rule addition case
SAC '18: Proceedings of the 33rd Annual ACM Symposium on Applied Computing

Defeasible Logic Programming (DeLP) is an argumentation-based reasoning tool that allows users to contemplate reasons for and against certain conclusions---the warrant status of literals in the knowledge base is the main output of this dialectical ...

Comments

Please enable JavaScript to view thecomments powered by Disqus.

Information & Contributors

Information

Published In

cover image ACM Conferences

SAC '24: Proceedings of the 39th ACM/SIGAPP Symposium on Applied Computing

April 2024

1898 pages

ISBN:9798400702433

DOI:10.1145/3605098

Chair:
Jiman Hong,
Program Chairs:
Juw Won Park,
Adam Przybyłek

Copyright © 2024 Copyright is held by the owner/author(s). Publication rights licensed to ACM.

Publication rights licensed to ACM. ACM acknowledges that this contribution was authored or co-authored by an employee, contractor or affiliate of a national government. As such, the Government retains a nonexclusive, royalty-free right to publish or reproduce this article, or to allow others to do so, for Government purposes only.

Sponsors

SIGAPP: ACM Special Interest Group on Applied Computing

Publisher

Association for Computing Machinery

New York, NY, United States

Publication History

Published: 21 May 2024

Check for updates

Author Tags

Qualifiers

Research-article

Funding Sources

CONICET
Universidad Nacional del Sur
Universidad Nacional de Entre Rios
Agencia Nacional de Promocion Cientifica y Tecnologica
MCIN/AEI/10.13039/501100011033
European Union Next- GenerationEU/PRTR

Conference

SAC '24

Sponsor:

SIGAPP

SAC '24: 39th ACM/SIGAPP Symposium on Applied Computing

April 8 - 12, 2024

Avila, Spain

Acceptance Rates

Overall Acceptance Rate 1,650 of 6,669 submissions, 25%

Upcoming Conference

SAC '25

Sponsor:
sigapp

The 40th ACM/SIGAPP Symposium on Applied Computing

March 31 - April 4, 2025

Catania , Italy

Contributors

Other Metrics

View Article Metrics

Bibliometrics & Citations

Bibliometrics

Article Metrics

1
Total Citations
View Citations
14
Total Downloads

Downloads (Last 12 months)14
Downloads (Last 6 weeks)2

Reflects downloads up to 03 Jan 2025

Other Metrics

View Author Metrics

Citations

Cited By

Soto YDeagustini CMartinez MSimari G(2024)Towards a Dialogue Game-Based Semantics for Extended Abstract Argumentation Frameworks Based on Indecision-BlockingScalable Uncertainty Management10.1007/978-3-031-76235-2_33(445-460)Online publication date: 12-Nov-2024
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-76235-2_33

View Options

Login options

Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.

Full Access

Get this Publication

View options

PDF

View or Download as a PDF file.

eReader

View online with eReader.

Media

Figures

Other

Tables

View Table of Contents