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 36 条
[1]   MAINTAINING KNOWLEDGE ABOUT TEMPORAL INTERVALS [J].
ALLEN, JF .
COMMUNICATIONS OF THE ACM, 1983, 26 (11) :832-843
[2]   On bipolarity in argumentation frameworks [J].
Amgoud, L. ;
Cayrol, C. ;
Lagasquie-Schiex, M. C. ;
Livet, P. .
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF INTELLIGENT SYSTEMS, 2008, 23 (10) :1062-1093
[3]  
[Anonymous], 2008, Elements of argumentation
[4]  
[Anonymous], 2011, 22 INT JOINT C ARTIF
[5]  
Arieli Ofer, 2012, Logics in Artificial Intelligence. Proceedings of the 13th European Conference (JELIA 2012), P28, DOI 10.1007/978-3-642-33353-8_3
[6]   Temporal Defeasible Reasoning [J].
Augusto, Juan C. ;
Simari, Guillermo R. .
Knowledge and Information Systems, 2001, 3 (03) :287-318
[7]  
Augusto JC, 1999, AI COMMUN, V12, P237
[8]   Modal and temporal argumentation networks [J].
Barringer, H. ;
Gabbay, D. M. ;
Woods, J. .
ARGUMENT & COMPUTATION, 2012, 3 (2-3) :203-227
[9]   Temporal, numerical and meta-level dynamics in argumentation networks [J].
Barringer, H. ;
Gabbay, D. M. ;
Woods, J. .
ARGUMENT & COMPUTATION, 2012, 3 (2-3) :143-202
[10]   Negotiation in multi-agent systems [J].
Beer, M ;
D'Inverno, M ;
Luck, M ;
Jennings, N ;
Preist, C ;
Schroeder, M .
KNOWLEDGE ENGINEERING REVIEW, 1999, 14 (03) :285-290