[go: up one dir, main page]
More Web Proxy on the site http://driver.im/ skip to main content
10.5555/2936924.2937018acmotherconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication PagesaamasConference Proceedingsconference-collections
research-article

Prioritised Default Logic as Rational Argumentation

Published: 09 May 2016 Publication History

Abstract

We endow Brewka's prioritised default logic (PDL) with argumentation semantics using the ASPIC+M framework for structured argumentation. We prove that the conclusions of the justified arguments correspond to the prioritised default extensions in a normatively rational manner. Argumentation semantics for PDL will allow for the application of argument game proof theories to the process of inference in PDL, making the reasons for accepting a conclusion transparent and the inference process more intuitive. This also opens up the possibility for argumentation-based distributed reasoning and communication amongst agents with PDL representations of mental attitudes.

References

[1]
K. Atkinson, T. Bench-Capon, and P. McBurney. A Dialogue Game Protocol for Multi-Agent Argument over Proposals for Action. Autonomous Agents and Multi-Agent Systems, 11(2):153--171, 2005.
[2]
P. Besnard and A. Hunter. Elements of Argumentation. The MIT Press, 2008.
[3]
G. Brewka. Preferred Subtheories: An Extended Logical Framework for Default Reasoning. In IJCAI, volume 89, pages 1043--1048, 1989.
[4]
G. Brewka. Adding Priorities and Specificity to Default Logic. In Logics in Artificial Intelligence, pages 247--260. Springer, 1994.
[5]
G. Brewka, M. Truszczynski, and S. Woltran. Representing Preferences Among Sets. In AAAI, 2010.
[6]
J. Broersen, M. Dastani, J. Hulstijn, and L. van der Torre. Goal Generation in the BOID Architecture. Cognitive Science Quarterly Journal, 2(3--4):428--447, 2002.
[7]
M. Caminada and L. Amgoud. On the Evaluation of Argumentation Formalisms. Artificial Intelligence, 171(5):286--310, 2007.
[8]
P. M. Dung. On the Acceptability of Arguments and its Fundamental Role in Nonmonotonic Reasoning, Logic Programming and n-Person Games. Artificial Intelligence, 77:321--357, 1995.
[9]
P. M. Dung. An Axiomatic Analysis of Structured Argumentation for Prioritised Default Reasoning. In ECAI2014, pages 267--272. IOS Press, 2014.
[10]
G. Governatori, M. J. Maher, G. Antoniou, and D. Billington. Argumentation Semantics for Defeasible Logic. Journal of Logic and Computation, 14(5):675--702, 2004.
[11]
S. Modgil. An Argumentation Based Semantics for Agent Reasoning. In M. Dastani, A. El Fallah Seghrouchni, J. Leite, and P. Torroni, editors, Languages, Methodologies and Development Tools for Multi-Agent Systems, volume 5118 of Lecture Notes in Computer Science, pages 37--53. Springer Berlin Heidelberg, 2008.
[12]
S. Modgil and M. Caminada. Proof Theories and Algorithms for Abstract Argumentation Frameworks. In Argumentation in Artificial Intelligence, pages 105--129. Springer, 2009.
[13]
S. Modgil and H. Prakken. A General Account of Argumentation with Preferences. Artificial Intelligence, 195:361--397, February 2013.
[14]
S. Modgil, F. Toni, et al. The Added Value of Argumentation. In S. Ossowski, editor, Agreement Technologies, volume 8, pages 357--403. Springer Netherlands, 2013.
[15]
H. Prakken. An Abstract Framework for Argumentation with Structured Arguments. Argument and Computation, 1(2):93--124, 2010.
[16]
R. Reiter. A Logic for Default Reasoning. Artificial Intelligence, 13:81--132, 1980.
[17]
A. P. Young, S. Modgil, and H. Prakken. A General Account of Argumentation with Preferences - Erratum. Available from http://www.dcs.kcl.ac.uk/staff/smodgil/2015-08--30_ASPIC
[18]
_fix_revised.pdf, last accessed 7/11/2015.

Cited By

View all
  • (2024)Strong Backdoors for Default LogicACM Transactions on Computational Logic10.1145/365502425:3(1-24)Online publication date: 30-Mar-2024
  • (2016)A rational account of classical logic argumentation for real-world agentsProceedings of the Twenty-second European Conference on Artificial Intelligence10.3233/978-1-61499-672-9-141(141-149)Online publication date: 29-Aug-2016

Recommendations

Comments

Please enable JavaScript to view thecomments powered by Disqus.

Information & Contributors

Information

Published In

cover image ACM Other conferences
AAMAS '16: Proceedings of the 2016 International Conference on Autonomous Agents & Multiagent Systems
May 2016
1580 pages
ISBN:9781450342391

Sponsors

  • IFAAMAS

In-Cooperation

Publisher

International Foundation for Autonomous Agents and Multiagent Systems

Richland, SC

Publication History

Published: 09 May 2016

Check for updates

Author Tags

  1. abstract argumentation
  2. agent reasoning and communication
  3. aspic$^+$
  4. prioritised default logic

Qualifiers

  • Research-article

Conference

AAMAS '16
Sponsor:

Acceptance Rates

AAMAS '16 Paper Acceptance Rate 137 of 550 submissions, 25%;
Overall Acceptance Rate 1,155 of 5,036 submissions, 23%

Contributors

Other Metrics

Bibliometrics & Citations

Bibliometrics

Article Metrics

  • Downloads (Last 12 months)4
  • Downloads (Last 6 weeks)0
Reflects downloads up to 26 Jan 2025

Other Metrics

Citations

Cited By

View all
  • (2024)Strong Backdoors for Default LogicACM Transactions on Computational Logic10.1145/365502425:3(1-24)Online publication date: 30-Mar-2024
  • (2016)A rational account of classical logic argumentation for real-world agentsProceedings of the Twenty-second European Conference on Artificial Intelligence10.3233/978-1-61499-672-9-141(141-149)Online publication date: 29-Aug-2016

View Options

Login options

View options

PDF

View or Download as a PDF file.

PDF

eReader

View online with eReader.

eReader

Figures

Tables

Media

Share

Share

Share this Publication link

Share on social media