A principled approach to the implementation of argumentation models

Article English OPEN
van Gijzel, Bas ; Nilsson, Henrik (2014)
  • Publisher: IOS Press

Argumentation theory combines philosophical concepts and computational models to deliver a practical approach to reasoning that handles uncertain information and possibly conflicting viewpoints. This paper focuses on the structured approach to argumentation that incorporates domain specific knowledge and argumentation schemes. There is a lack of implementations and implementation methods for most structured models. This paper shows how taking a principled approach, using the programming language Haskell, helps addressing this problem. We construct a framework for developing structured argumentation models and translations between models (given intertranslatability of models). We furthermore provide a methodology to quickly test and formally prove desirable properties of such implementations using a theorem prover. We demonstrate our approach on the Carneades argumentation model and Dung's abstract argumentation frameworks, implementing both the models and a translation from Carneades into AFs. We then provide implementations of correspondence properties and an initial formalisation of Dung's AFs into a theorem prover. The final result is a verified pipeline from the structured model Carneades into existing efficient SAT-based implementations of Dung's AFs.
  • References (15)
    15 references, page 1 of 2

    [1] Gerhard Brewka, Paul E. Dunne, and Stefan Woltran. Relating the semantics of abstract dialectical frameworks and standard AFs. In Proceedings of the 22nd International Joint Conference on Arti cial Intelligence (IJCAI-11), pages 780{785, 2011.

    [2] Gerhard Brewka and Thomas F. Gordon. Carneades and abstract dialectical frameworks: A reconstruction. In Massimiliano Giacomin and Guillermo R. Simari, editors, Computational Models of Argument. Proceedings of COMMA 2010, pages 3{12, Amsterdam etc, 2010. IOS Press 2010.

    [3] Federico Cerutti, Paul Dunne, Massimiliano Giacomin, and Mauro Vallati. A SAT-based approach for computing extensions in abstract argumentation. In 2nd International Workshop on Theory and Applications of Formal Argumentation (TAFA-13). Springer, 2013.

    [4] Gunther Charwat, Johannes Peter Wallner, and Stefan Woltran. Utilizing ASP for generating and visualizing argumentation frameworks. CoRR, abs/1301.1388, 2013.

    [5] Koen Claessen and John Hughes. Quickcheck: a lightweight tool for random testing of haskell programs. Acm sigplan notices, 46(4):53{64, 2011.

    [6] Phan Minh Dung. On the acceptability of arguments and its fundamental role in nonmonotonic reasoning, logic programming and n-person games. Arti cial Intelligence, 77(2):321{ 357, 1995.

    [7] Wolfgang Dvorak, Matti Jarvisalo, Johannes Peter Wallner, and Stefan Woltran. Complexity-sensitive decision procedures for abstract argumentation. Arti cial Intelligence, 206:53{78, 2014.

    [8] Dorian Gaertner and Francesca Toni. Computing arguments and attacks in assumptionbased argumentation. IEEE Intelligent Systems, 22(6):24{33, November 2007.

    [9] Bas van Gijzel and Henrik Nilsson. Haskell gets argumentative. In Proceedings of the Symposium on Trends in Functional Programming (TFP 2012), LNCS 7829, pages 215{ 230, St Andrews, UK, 2013. LNCS.

    [10] Bas van Gijzel and Henrik Nilsson. Towards a framework for the implementation and veri cation of translations between argumentation models. In Accepted for Post Proceedings of the 25th symposium on Implementation and Application of Functional Languages (IFL 2013), 2014.

  • Similar Research Results (4)
  • Metrics
    No metrics available
Share - Bookmark