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
  • [21] Learning argumentation frameworks from labelings
    Bengel, Lars
    Thimm, Matthias
    Rienstra, Tjitze
    ARGUMENT & COMPUTATION, 2024, 15 (02) : 121 - 159
  • [22] Dialogue Games for Argumentation Frameworks with Necessities
    Nouioua, Farid
    Boutouhami, Sara
    SYMBOLIC AND QUANTITATIVE APPROACHES TO REASONING WITH UNCERTAINTY, ECSQARU 2015, 2015, 9161 : 72 - 82
  • [23] Collective Argumentation: The Case of Aggregating Support-Relations of Bipolar Argumentation Frameworks
    Chen, Weiwei
    ELECTRONIC PROCEEDINGS IN THEORETICAL COMPUTER SCIENCE, 2021, 335 : 87 - 102
  • [24] Collective Argumentation: The Case of Aggregating Support-Relations of Bipolar Argumentation Frameworks
    Chen, Weiwei
    ELECTRONIC PROCEEDINGS IN THEORETICAL COMPUTER SCIENCE, 2021, (335): : 87 - 102
  • [25] Maximising goals achievement through abstract argumentation frameworks: An optimal approach
    Cohen, Andrea
    Gottifredi, Sebastian
    Vallati, Mauro
    Garcia, Alejandro J.
    Antoniou, Grigoris
    EXPERT SYSTEMS WITH APPLICATIONS, 2020, 141 (141)
  • [26] Argumentation Using Temporal Knowledge
    Mann, Nicholas
    Hunter, Anthony
    COMPUTATIONAL MODELS OF ARGUMENT, PROCEEDINGS OF COMMA 2008, 2008, 172 : 204 - 215
  • [27] Generalizations of Dung Frameworks and Their Role in Formal Argumentation
    Brewka, Gerhard
    Polberg, Sylwia
    Woltran, Stefan
    IEEE INTELLIGENT SYSTEMS, 2014, 29 (01) : 30 - 38
  • [28] Modeling time and valuation in structured argumentation frameworks
    Budan, Maximiliano C. D.
    Lucero, Mauro Gomez
    Chesnevar, Carlos
    Simari, Guillermo R.
    INFORMATION SCIENCES, 2015, 290 : 22 - 44
  • [29] Understanding Group Polarization with Bipolar Argumentation Frameworks
    Proietti, Carlo
    COMPUTATIONAL MODELS OF ARGUMENT, 2016, 287 : 41 - 52
  • [30] Valid attacks in argumentation frameworks with recursive attacks
    Cayrol, C.
    Fandinno, J.
    del Cerro, L. Farinas
    Lagasquie-Schiex, M-C
    ANNALS OF MATHEMATICS AND ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE, 2021, 89 (1-2) : 53 - 101