Moving between Argumentation Frameworks

Nir Oren, Michael Luck, Chris Reed

Research output: Chapter in Book/Report/Conference proceedingConference contribution

16 Citations (Scopus)
4 Downloads (Pure)

Abstract

Abstract argument frameworks have been used for various applications within multi-agent systems, including reasoning and negotiation. Different argument frameworks make use of different inter-argument relations and semantics to identify some subset of arguments as coherent, yet there is no easy way to map between these frameworks; most commonly, this is done manually according to human intuition. In response, in this paper, we show how a set of arguments described using Dung’s or Nielsen’s argument frameworks can be mapped from and to an argument framework that includes both attack and support relations. This mapping preserves the framework’s semantics in the sense that an argument deemed coherent in one framework is coherent in the other under a related semantics. Interestingly, this translation is not unique, with one set of arguments in the support based framework mapping to multiple argument sets within the attack only framework. Additionally, we show how EAF can be mapped into a subset of the argument interchange format (AIF). By using this mapping, any other argument framework using this subset of AIF can be translated into a DAF while preserving its semantics.
Original languageEnglish
Title of host publicationProceedings of the 2010 International Conference on Computational Models of Argument
Subtitle of host publicationCOMMA 2010
PublisherIOS Press
Pages379-390
Number of pages12
ISBN (Print)9781607506188
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 2010

Publication series

NameFrontiers in Artificial Intelligence and Applications
PublisherIOS Press
Volume216
ISSN (Print)0922-6389

Fingerprint

Semantics
Interchanges
Multi agent systems

Keywords

  • Argumentation
  • Abstract Argument Frameworks
  • Semantics

Cite this

Oren, N., Luck, M., & Reed, C. (2010). Moving between Argumentation Frameworks. In Proceedings of the 2010 International Conference on Computational Models of Argument: COMMA 2010 (pp. 379-390). (Frontiers in Artificial Intelligence and Applications; Vol. 216). IOS Press. https://doi.org/10.3233/978-1-60750-619-5-379

Moving between Argumentation Frameworks. / Oren, Nir; Luck, Michael; Reed, Chris.

Proceedings of the 2010 International Conference on Computational Models of Argument: COMMA 2010. IOS Press, 2010. p. 379-390 (Frontiers in Artificial Intelligence and Applications; Vol. 216).

Research output: Chapter in Book/Report/Conference proceedingConference contribution

Oren, N, Luck, M & Reed, C 2010, Moving between Argumentation Frameworks. in Proceedings of the 2010 International Conference on Computational Models of Argument: COMMA 2010. Frontiers in Artificial Intelligence and Applications, vol. 216, IOS Press, pp. 379-390. https://doi.org/10.3233/978-1-60750-619-5-379
Oren N, Luck M, Reed C. Moving between Argumentation Frameworks. In Proceedings of the 2010 International Conference on Computational Models of Argument: COMMA 2010. IOS Press. 2010. p. 379-390. (Frontiers in Artificial Intelligence and Applications). https://doi.org/10.3233/978-1-60750-619-5-379
Oren, Nir ; Luck, Michael ; Reed, Chris. / Moving between Argumentation Frameworks. Proceedings of the 2010 International Conference on Computational Models of Argument: COMMA 2010. IOS Press, 2010. pp. 379-390 (Frontiers in Artificial Intelligence and Applications).
@inproceedings{e8af2fd260a04eab980cca82fb2b539c,
title = "Moving between Argumentation Frameworks",
abstract = "Abstract argument frameworks have been used for various applications within multi-agent systems, including reasoning and negotiation. Different argument frameworks make use of different inter-argument relations and semantics to identify some subset of arguments as coherent, yet there is no easy way to map between these frameworks; most commonly, this is done manually according to human intuition. In response, in this paper, we show how a set of arguments described using Dung’s or Nielsen’s argument frameworks can be mapped from and to an argument framework that includes both attack and support relations. This mapping preserves the framework’s semantics in the sense that an argument deemed coherent in one framework is coherent in the other under a related semantics. Interestingly, this translation is not unique, with one set of arguments in the support based framework mapping to multiple argument sets within the attack only framework. Additionally, we show how EAF can be mapped into a subset of the argument interchange format (AIF). By using this mapping, any other argument framework using this subset of AIF can be translated into a DAF while preserving its semantics.",
keywords = "Argumentation, Abstract Argument Frameworks, Semantics",
author = "Nir Oren and Michael Luck and Chris Reed",
year = "2010",
doi = "10.3233/978-1-60750-619-5-379",
language = "English",
isbn = "9781607506188",
series = "Frontiers in Artificial Intelligence and Applications",
publisher = "IOS Press",
pages = "379--390",
booktitle = "Proceedings of the 2010 International Conference on Computational Models of Argument",

}

TY - GEN

T1 - Moving between Argumentation Frameworks

AU - Oren, Nir

AU - Luck, Michael

AU - Reed, Chris

PY - 2010

Y1 - 2010

N2 - Abstract argument frameworks have been used for various applications within multi-agent systems, including reasoning and negotiation. Different argument frameworks make use of different inter-argument relations and semantics to identify some subset of arguments as coherent, yet there is no easy way to map between these frameworks; most commonly, this is done manually according to human intuition. In response, in this paper, we show how a set of arguments described using Dung’s or Nielsen’s argument frameworks can be mapped from and to an argument framework that includes both attack and support relations. This mapping preserves the framework’s semantics in the sense that an argument deemed coherent in one framework is coherent in the other under a related semantics. Interestingly, this translation is not unique, with one set of arguments in the support based framework mapping to multiple argument sets within the attack only framework. Additionally, we show how EAF can be mapped into a subset of the argument interchange format (AIF). By using this mapping, any other argument framework using this subset of AIF can be translated into a DAF while preserving its semantics.

AB - Abstract argument frameworks have been used for various applications within multi-agent systems, including reasoning and negotiation. Different argument frameworks make use of different inter-argument relations and semantics to identify some subset of arguments as coherent, yet there is no easy way to map between these frameworks; most commonly, this is done manually according to human intuition. In response, in this paper, we show how a set of arguments described using Dung’s or Nielsen’s argument frameworks can be mapped from and to an argument framework that includes both attack and support relations. This mapping preserves the framework’s semantics in the sense that an argument deemed coherent in one framework is coherent in the other under a related semantics. Interestingly, this translation is not unique, with one set of arguments in the support based framework mapping to multiple argument sets within the attack only framework. Additionally, we show how EAF can be mapped into a subset of the argument interchange format (AIF). By using this mapping, any other argument framework using this subset of AIF can be translated into a DAF while preserving its semantics.

KW - Argumentation

KW - Abstract Argument Frameworks

KW - Semantics

U2 - 10.3233/978-1-60750-619-5-379

DO - 10.3233/978-1-60750-619-5-379

M3 - Conference contribution

SN - 9781607506188

T3 - Frontiers in Artificial Intelligence and Applications

SP - 379

EP - 390

BT - Proceedings of the 2010 International Conference on Computational Models of Argument

PB - IOS Press

ER -