Details
| Original language | English |
|---|---|
| Title of host publication | Proceedings of the 32nd International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence, IJCAI 2023 |
| Editors | Edith Elkind |
| Pages | 3212-3220 |
| Number of pages | 9 |
| ISBN (electronic) | 9781956792034 |
| Publication status | Published - 2023 |
Publication series
| Name | IJCAI International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence |
|---|---|
| Volume | 2023-August |
| ISSN (Print) | 1045-0823 |
Abstract
Argumentation is a well-established formalism for nonmonotonic reasoning and a vibrant area of research in AI. Claim-augmented argumentation frameworks (CAFs) have been introduced to deploy a conclusion-oriented perspective. CAFs expand argumentation frameworks by an additional step which involves retaining claims for an accepted set of arguments. We introduce a novel concept of a justification status for claims, a quantitative measure of extensions supporting a particular claim. The well-studied problems of credulous and skeptical reasoning can then be seen as simply the two endpoints of the spectrum when considered as a justification level of a claim. Furthermore, we explore the parameterized complexity of various reasoning problems for CAFs, including the quantitative reasoning for claim assertions. We begin by presenting a suitable graph representation that includes arguments and their associated claims. Our analysis includes the parameter treewidth, and we present decomposition-guided reductions between reasoning problems in CAF and the validity problem for QBF.
Cite this
- Standard
- Harvard
- Apa
- Vancouver
- BibTeX
- RIS
Proceedings of the 32nd International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence, IJCAI 2023. ed. / Edith Elkind. 2023. p. 3212-3220 (IJCAI International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence; Vol. 2023-August).
Research output: Chapter in book/report/conference proceeding › Conference contribution › Research › peer review
}
TY - GEN
T1 - Quantitative Reasoning and Structural Complexity for Claim-Centric Argumentation.
AU - Fichte, Johannes Klaus
AU - Hecher, Markus
AU - Mahmood, Yasir
AU - Meier, Arne
N1 - Funding Information: Authors are stated in alphabetical order. The work was supported by ELLIIT funded by the Swedish government, by the Austrian Science Fund (FWF) grants J4656, P32830, and Y1329, Society for Research Funding Lower Austria (GFF) grant ExzF-0004, Vienna Science and Technology Fund (WWTF) grants ICT19-060 and ICT19-065, by the European Union’s Horizon Europe research and innovation programme within project ENEXA (101070305), and the German Research Organisation (DFG) project ME4279/3-1 (511769688).
PY - 2023
Y1 - 2023
N2 - Argumentation is a well-established formalism for nonmonotonic reasoning and a vibrant area of research in AI. Claim-augmented argumentation frameworks (CAFs) have been introduced to deploy a conclusion-oriented perspective. CAFs expand argumentation frameworks by an additional step which involves retaining claims for an accepted set of arguments. We introduce a novel concept of a justification status for claims, a quantitative measure of extensions supporting a particular claim. The well-studied problems of credulous and skeptical reasoning can then be seen as simply the two endpoints of the spectrum when considered as a justification level of a claim. Furthermore, we explore the parameterized complexity of various reasoning problems for CAFs, including the quantitative reasoning for claim assertions. We begin by presenting a suitable graph representation that includes arguments and their associated claims. Our analysis includes the parameter treewidth, and we present decomposition-guided reductions between reasoning problems in CAF and the validity problem for QBF.
AB - Argumentation is a well-established formalism for nonmonotonic reasoning and a vibrant area of research in AI. Claim-augmented argumentation frameworks (CAFs) have been introduced to deploy a conclusion-oriented perspective. CAFs expand argumentation frameworks by an additional step which involves retaining claims for an accepted set of arguments. We introduce a novel concept of a justification status for claims, a quantitative measure of extensions supporting a particular claim. The well-studied problems of credulous and skeptical reasoning can then be seen as simply the two endpoints of the spectrum when considered as a justification level of a claim. Furthermore, we explore the parameterized complexity of various reasoning problems for CAFs, including the quantitative reasoning for claim assertions. We begin by presenting a suitable graph representation that includes arguments and their associated claims. Our analysis includes the parameter treewidth, and we present decomposition-guided reductions between reasoning problems in CAF and the validity problem for QBF.
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85170398884&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.24963/ijcai.2023/358
DO - 10.24963/ijcai.2023/358
M3 - Conference contribution
T3 - IJCAI International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence
SP - 3212
EP - 3220
BT - Proceedings of the 32nd International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence, IJCAI 2023
A2 - Elkind, Edith
ER -