Acceptance in incomplete argumentation frameworks

被引:29
|
作者
Baumeister, Dorothea [1 ]
Jarvisalo, Matti [2 ]
Neugebauer, Daniel [1 ]
Niskanen, Andreas [2 ]
Rothe, Joerg [1 ]
机构
[1] Heinrich Heine Univ Dusseldorf, Inst Informat, Dusseldorf, Germany
[2] Univ Helsinki, Helsinki Inst Informat Technol HIIT, Dept Comp Sci, Helsinki, Finland
基金
芬兰科学院;
关键词
Abstract argumentation; Incomplete knowledge; Incomplete argumentation frameworks; Computational complexity; Decision procedures; Empirical evaluation; DETERMINISTIC EXTENSIONS; DYNAMICS; EQUIVALENCE; ALGORITHMS; COMPLEXITY; SYSTEMS; COMPUTATION; REFINEMENT; HARD;
D O I
10.1016/j.artint.2021.103470
中图分类号
TP18 [人工智能理论];
学科分类号
081104 ; 0812 ; 0835 ; 1405 ;
摘要
A Abstract argumentation frameworks (AFs), originally proposed by Dung, constitute a central formal model for the study of computational aspects of argumentation in AI. Credulous and skeptical acceptance of arguments in a given AF are well-studied problems both in terms of theoretical analysis-especially computational complexity-and the development of practical decision procedures for the problems. However, AFs make the assumption that all attacks between arguments are certain (i.e., present attacks are known to exist, and missing attacks are known to not exist), which can in various settings be a restrictive assumption. A generalization of AFs to incomplete AFs was recently proposed as a formalism that allows the representation of both uncertain attacks and uncertain arguments in AFs. In this article, we explore the impact of allowing for modeling such uncertainties in AFs on the computational complexity of natural generalizations of acceptance problems to incomplete AFs under various central AF semantics. Complementing the complexity-theoretic analysis, we also develop the first practical decision procedures for all of the NP-hard variants of acceptance in incomplete AFs. In terms of complexity analysis, we establish a full complexity landscape, showing that depending on the variant of acceptance and property/semantics, the complexity of acceptance in incomplete AFs ranges from polynomial-time decidable to completeness for Sigma(p)(3). In terms of algorithms, we show through an extensive empirical evaluation that an implementation of the proposed decision procedures, based on boolean satisfiability (SAT) solving, is effective in deciding variants of acceptance under uncertainties. We also establish conditions for what type of atomic changes are guaranteed to be redundant from the perspective of preserving extensions of completions of incomplete AFs, and show that the results allow for considerably improving the empirical efficiency of the proposed SAT-based counterexample-guided abstraction refinement algorithms for acceptance in incomplete AFs for problem variants with complexity beyond NP. (C) 2021 The Authors. Published by Elsevier B.V.
引用
收藏
页数:35
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [1] Deciding Acceptance in Incomplete Argumentation Frameworks
    Niskanen, Andreas
    Neugebauer, Daniel
    Jaervisalo, Matti
    Rothe, Joerg
    [J]. THIRTY-FOURTH AAAI CONFERENCE ON ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE, THE THIRTY-SECOND INNOVATIVE APPLICATIONS OF ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE CONFERENCE AND THE TENTH AAAI SYMPOSIUM ON EDUCATIONAL ADVANCES IN ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE, 2020, 34 : 2942 - 2949
  • [2] Credulous and Skeptical Acceptance in Incomplete Argumentation Frameworks
    Baumeister, Dorothea
    Neugebauer, Daniel
    Rothe, Joerg
    [J]. COMPUTATIONAL MODELS OF ARGUMENT (COMMA 2018), 2018, 305 : 181 - 192
  • [3] Explainable acceptance in probabilistic and incomplete abstract argumentation frameworks
    Alfano, Gianvincenzo
    Calautti, Marco
    Greco, Sergio
    Parisi, Francesco
    Trubitsyna, Irina
    [J]. ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE, 2023, 323
  • [4] Constrained Incomplete Argumentation Frameworks
    Mailly, Jean-Guy
    [J]. SYMBOLIC AND QUANTITATIVE APPROACHES TO REASONING WITH UNCERTAINTY, ECSQARU 2021, 2021, 12897 : 103 - 116
  • [5] Verification in incomplete argumentation frameworks
    Baumeister, Dorothea
    Neugebauer, Daniel
    Rothe, Joerg
    Schadrack, Hilmar
    [J]. ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE, 2018, 264 : 1 - 26
  • [6] On the acceptance of loops in argumentation frameworks
    Arieli, Ofer
    [J]. JOURNAL OF LOGIC AND COMPUTATION, 2016, 26 (04) : 1203 - 1234
  • [7] Stability and Relevance in Incomplete Argumentation Frameworks
    Odekerken, Daphne
    Borg, AnneMarie
    Bex, Floris
    [J]. COMPUTATIONAL MODELS OF ARGUMENT, COMMA 2022, 2022, 353 : 272 - 283
  • [8] Complexity of Verification in Incomplete Argumentation Frameworks
    Baumeister, Dorothea
    Neugebauer, Daniel
    Rothe, Joerg
    Schadrack, Hilmar
    [J]. THIRTY-SECOND AAAI CONFERENCE ON ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE / THIRTIETH INNOVATIVE APPLICATIONS OF ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE CONFERENCE / EIGHTH AAAI SYMPOSIUM ON EDUCATIONAL ADVANCES IN ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE, 2018, : 1753 - 1760
  • [9] Incomplete Argumentation Frameworks: Properties and Complexity
    Alfano, Gianvincenzo
    Greco, Sergio
    Parisi, Francesco
    Trubitsyna, Irina
    [J]. THIRTY-SIXTH AAAI CONFERENCE ON ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE / THIRTY-FOURTH CONFERENCE ON INNOVATIVE APPLICATIONS OF ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE / THE TWELVETH SYMPOSIUM ON EDUCATIONAL ADVANCES IN ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE, 2022, : 5451 - 5460
  • [10] On acceptance conditions in abstract argumentation frameworks
    Alfano, Gianvincenzo
    Greco, Sergio
    Parisi, Francesco
    Trubitsyna, Irina
    [J]. INFORMATION SCIENCES, 2023, 625 : 757 - 779