Bipolarity in temporal argumentation frameworks

被引:15
|
作者
Budan, Maximiliano C. D. [1 ,2 ,3 ]
Laura Cobo, Maria [1 ]
Martinez, Diego C. [1 ,2 ]
Simari, Guillermo R. [1 ]
机构
[1] UNS, CONICET, ICIC, Dept Ciencias & Ingn Computac, San Andres 800, RA-8000 Bahia Blanca, Buenos Aires, Argentina
[2] Consejo Nacl Invest Cient & Tecn, Av Rivadavia 1917, Buenos Aires, DF, Argentina
[3] Univ Nacl Santiago Del Estero, Dept Math, Belgranos 1912, RA-4200 Capital, Santiago Del Es, Argentina
关键词
Human-like reasoning; Temporal argumentation; Dynamic argumentation models; Timed interval-based semantics; Bipolarity; ACCEPTABILITY; SUPPORT;
D O I
10.1016/j.ijar.2017.01.013
中图分类号
TP18 [人工智能理论];
学科分类号
081104 ; 0812 ; 0835 ; 1405 ;
摘要
A Timed Argumentation Framework (TAF) is a formalism where arguments are only valid for consideration during specific intervals of time, called availability intervals, which are defined for every individual argument. The original proposal is based on a single abstract notion of attack between arguments that remains static and permanent in time. Thus, in general, when identifying the set of acceptable arguments, the outcome associated with a TAF will vary over time. Here, we are introducing an extension of TAF adding the capability of modeling a support relation between arguments. In this sense, the resulting framework provides a suitable model for different time-dependent issues; thus, the main contribution of this work is to provide an enhanced framework for modeling a positive (support) and negative (attack) interaction which varies over time, features that are highly relevant in many real-world situations. This addition leads to a Timed Bipolar Argumentation Framework (T-BAF), where classical argument extensions can be defined, aiming at advancing in the integration of temporal argumentation in different application domains. (C) 2017 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
引用
收藏
页码:1 / 22
页数:22
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [1] Temporal duration-based probabilistic argumentation frameworks
    Bistarelli, Stefano
    David, Victor
    Santini, Francesco
    Taticchi, Carlo
    JOURNAL OF LOGIC AND COMPUTATION, 2024, 34 (08) : 1399 - 1429
  • [2] JOINT ATTACKS AND ACCRUAL IN ARGUMENTATION FRAMEWORKS
    Bikakis, Antonis
    Cohen, Andrea
    Dvorak, Wolfgang
    Flouris, Giorgos
    Parsons, Simon
    JOURNAL OF APPLIED LOGICS-IFCOLOG JOURNAL OF LOGICS AND THEIR APPLICATIONS, 2021, 8 (06): : 1437 - 1501
  • [3] Argumentation Frameworks with Necessities
    Nouioua, Farid
    Risch, Vincent
    SCALABLE UNCERTAINTY MANAGEMENT, 2011, 6929 : 163 - 176
  • [4] Argumentation frameworks with necessities and their relationship with logic programs
    Nouioua, Farid
    Boutouhami, Sara
    ARGUMENT & COMPUTATION, 2023, 14 (01) : 17 - 58
  • [5] Bipolarity in Argumentation Graphs: Towards a Better Understanding
    Cayrol, Claudette
    Lagasquie-Schiex, Marie-Christine
    SCALABLE UNCERTAINTY MANAGEMENT, 2011, 6929 : 137 - 148
  • [6] Bipolarity in argumentation graphs: Towards a better understanding
    Cayrol, Claudette
    Lagasquie-Schiex, Marie-Christine
    INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF APPROXIMATE REASONING, 2013, 54 (07) : 876 - 899
  • [7] Extended Explanatory Argumentation Frameworks
    Dauphin, Jeremie
    Cramer, Marcos
    THEORY AND APPLICATIONS OF FORMAL ARGUMENTATION, TAFA 2017, 2018, 10757 : 86 - 101
  • [8] Abstract Argumentation Frameworks with Fallible Evidence
    Skiba, Kenneth
    Thimm, Matthias
    Cohen, Andrea
    Gottifredi, Sebastian
    Garcia, Alejandro J.
    COMPUTATIONAL MODELS OF ARGUMENT (COMMA 2020), 2020, 326 : 347 - 354
  • [9] Argumentation Frameworks-A Brief Review
    Sadiq, Ahmed T.
    Abdulah, Hasanen S.
    Kareem, Adnan Taher
    INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF ONLINE AND BIOMEDICAL ENGINEERING, 2022, 18 (02) : 55 - 70
  • [10] Generalising Semantics to Weighted Bipolar Argumentation Frameworks
    Cordeiro, Renan
    Alcantara, Joao
    INTELLIGENT SYSTEMS, PT I, 2022, 13653 : 520 - 534