Abstract
In the literature, enforcement consists in changing an argumentation system in order to force it to accept a given set of arguments. In this paper, we extend this notion by allowing incomplete information about the initial argumentation system. Generalized enforcement is an operation that maps a propositional formula describing a system and a propositional formula that describes a goal, to a new formula describing the possible resulting systems. This is done under some constraints about the allowed changes. We give a set of postulates restraining the class of enforcement operators and provide a representation theorem linking them to a family of proximity relations on argumentation systems.
Access provided by Autonomous University of Puebla. Download to read the full chapter text
Chapter PDF
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Alchourrón, C., Gärdenfors, P., Makinson, D.: On the logic of theory change: partial meet contraction and revision functions. Journal of Symbolic Logic 50, 510–530 (1985)
Baumann, R.: What does it take to enforce an argument? minimal change in abstract argumentation. In: ECAI, pp. 127–132 (2012)
Baumann, R., Brewka, G.: Expanding argumentation frameworks: Enforcing and monotonicity results. In: Proc. of COMMA, pp. 75–86. IOS Press (2010)
Bisquert, P., Cayrol, C., de Saint Cyr, F.D., Lagasquie-Schiex, M.C.: Axiomatic approach of enforcement in argumentation. Tech. rep., IRIT, Toulouse, France (2013), ftp://ftp.irit.fr/pub/IRIT/ADRIA/rap-IRIT-2013-24.pdf
Bisquert, P., Cayrol, C., de Saint-Cyr, F.D., Lagasquie-Schiex, M.-C.: Change in argumentation systems: Exploring the interest of removing an argument. In: Benferhat, S., Grant, J. (eds.) SUM 2011. LNCS, vol. 6929, pp. 275–288. Springer, Heidelberg (2011)
Bisquert, P., Cayrol, C., de Saint-Cyr, F.D., Lagasquie-Schiex, M.-C.: Duality between Addition and Removal. In: Greco, S., Bouchon-Meunier, B., Coletti, G., Fedrizzi, M., Matarazzo, B., Yager, R.R. (eds.) IPMU 2012, Part I. CCIS, vol. 297, pp. 219–229. Springer, Heidelberg (2012)
Boella, G., Kaci, S., van der Torre, L.: Dynamics in argumentation with single extensions: Abstraction principles and the grounded extension. In: Sossai, C., Chemello, G. (eds.) ECSQARU 2009. LNCS (LNAI), vol. 5590, pp. 107–118. Springer, Heidelberg (2009)
Boella, G., Kaci, S., van der Torre, L.: Dynamics in argumentation with single extensions: Attack refinement and the grounded extension. In: Proc. of AAMAS, pp. 1213–1214 (2009)
Cayrol, C., de Saint-Cyr, F.D., Lagasquie-Schiex, M.-C.: Change in abstract argumentation frameworks: Adding an argument. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 38, 49–84 (2010)
Cordier, M.-O., Siegel, P.: Prioritized transitions for updates. In: Froidevaux, C., Kohlas, J. (eds.) ECSQARU 1995. LNCS, vol. 946, pp. 142–150. Springer, Heidelberg (1995)
Coste-Marquis, S., Devred, C., Marquis, P.: Constrained argumentation frameworks. In: Proc. of KR, pp. 112–122 (2006)
Dubois, D., de Saint-Cyr, F.D., Prade, H.: Update postulates without inertia. In: Froidevaux, C., Kohlas, J. (eds.) ECSQARU 1995. LNCS (LNAI), vol. 946, pp. 162–170. Springer, Heidelberg (1995)
Dung, P.: On the acceptability of arguments and its fundamental role in nonmonotonic reasoning, logic programming and n-person games. Artificial Intelligence 77(2), 321–358 (1995)
Herzig, A.: On updates with integrity constraints. In: Belief Change in Rational Agents (2005)
Herzig, A., Rifi, O.: Propositional belief base update and minimal change. Artificial Intelligence 115, 107–138 (1999)
Katsuno, H., Mendelzon, A.: On the difference between updating a knowledge base and revising it. In: Proc. of KR, pp. 387–394 (1991)
Liao, B., Jin, L., Koons, R.: Dynamics of argumentation systems: A division-based method. Artificial Intelligence 175(11), 1790 (2011)
Moguillansky, M.O., Rotstein, N.D., Falappa, M.A., García, A.J., Simari, G.R.: Argument theory change through defeater activation. In: Proc. of COMMA, pp. 359–366. IOS Press (2010)
Winslett, M.: Reasoning about action using a possible models approach. In: Proc. of AAAI, pp. 89–93 (1988)
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2013 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg
About this paper
Cite this paper
Bisquert, P., Cayrol, C., de Saint-Cyr, F.D., Lagasquie-Schiex, MC. (2013). Enforcement in Argumentation Is a Kind of Update. In: Liu, W., Subrahmanian, V.S., Wijsen, J. (eds) Scalable Uncertainty Management. SUM 2013. Lecture Notes in Computer Science(), vol 8078. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-40381-1_3
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-40381-1_3
Publisher Name: Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg
Print ISBN: 978-3-642-40380-4
Online ISBN: 978-3-642-40381-1
eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)