Equipping Abstract Argumentation Solvers for Verifying Negative Results

被引:0
作者
Dvorak, Wolfgang [1 ]
Gressler, Alexander [1 ]
Woltran, Stefan [1 ]
机构
[1] TU Wien, Inst Log & Computat, Vienna, Austria
来源
39TH ANNUAL ACM SYMPOSIUM ON APPLIED COMPUTING, SAC 2024 | 2024年
基金
奥地利科学基金会;
关键词
Abstract argumentation; SETAF; Inconsistency proofs; INTERNATIONAL COMPETITION; COMPUTATIONAL MODELS; FRAMEWORKS; SETS;
D O I
10.1145/3605098.3636073
中图分类号
TP39 [计算机的应用];
学科分类号
081203 ; 0835 ;
摘要
.Abstract argumentation frameworks (AFs) are a popular formalism for modeling argumentation processes. Thus, various solvers have been developed that can be used to answer decision problems on such frameworks and that regularly compete within the context of competitions. For positive results, these solvers typically provide some sort of model or extension, making it easy to verify their results. However, negative results cannot be easily verified in such a way, creating a need for some sort of certificate to be able to check these results as well. While, for instance, SAT solvers commonly support inconsistency proofs, this is not the case for abstract argumentation solvers yet. In this work, we provide a formal definition of such a certificate for SETAFs, a generalization of Dung AFs, and provide a prototype implementation of a genuine CDCL-based solver for SETAFs that can produce such inconsistency proofs as well as a tool for verifying these proofs.
引用
收藏
页码:762 / 769
页数:8
相关论文
共 28 条
  • [1] Inconsistency Proofs for ASP: The ASP-DRUPE Format
    Alviano, Mario
    Dodaro, Carmine
    Fichte, Johannes K.
    Hecher, Markus
    Philipp, Tobias
    Rath, Jakob
    [J]. THEORY AND PRACTICE OF LOGIC PROGRAMMING, 2019, 19 (5-6) : 891 - 907
  • [2] Toward Artificial Argumentation
    Atkinson, Katie
    Baroni, Pietro
    Giacomin, Massimiliano
    Hunter, Anthony
    Prakken, Henry
    Reed, Chris
    Simari, Guillermo
    Thimm, Matthias
    Villata, Serena
    [J]. AI MAGAZINE, 2017, 38 (03) : 25 - 36
  • [3] Baroni P., 2018, Handbook of Formal Argumentation
  • [4] Logical theories and abstract argumentation: A survey of existing works
    Besnard, Philippe
    Cayrol, Claudette
    Lagasquie-Schiex, Marie-Christine
    [J]. ARGUMENT & COMPUTATION, 2020, 11 (1-2) : 41 - 102
  • [5] Bikakis A, 2021, J APPL LOG-IFCOLOG, V8, P1437
  • [6] Bistarelli S., 2020, P 4 WORKSH ADV ARG A, V2777, P90
  • [7] Cerutti F, 2017, J APPL LOG-IFCOLOG, V4, P2623
  • [8] ON THE ACCEPTABILITY OF ARGUMENTS AND ITS FUNDAMENTAL ROLE IN NONMONOTONIC REASONING, LOGIC PROGRAMMING AND N-PERSON GAMES
    DUNG, PM
    [J]. ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE, 1995, 77 (02) : 321 - 357
  • [9] Dvo, 2018, P 2 INT WORKSH SYST, V2171, P10
  • [10] On the Relation Between Claim-Augmented Argumentation Frameworks and Collective Attacks
    Dvorak, Wolfgang
    Rapberger, Anna
    Woltran, Stefan
    [J]. ECAI 2020: 24TH EUROPEAN CONFERENCE ON ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE, 2020, 325 : 721 - 728