argumentation logics lecture 3: abstract argumentation preferred semantics

29
Argumentation Logics Lecture 3: Abstract argumentation preferred semantics Henry Prakken Chongqing May 29, 2010

Upload: manchu

Post on 25-Feb-2016

67 views

Category:

Documents


3 download

DESCRIPTION

Argumentation Logics Lecture 3: Abstract argumentation preferred semantics. Henry Prakken Chongqing May 29, 2010. Contents. Review of stable semantics Definitions A problem Preferred semantics Labelling-based Extension-based Abstract argumentation: general remarks on semantics. - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

TRANSCRIPT

Page 1: Argumentation Logics Lecture 3: Abstract argumentation preferred semantics

Argumentation LogicsLecture 3:

Abstract argumentationpreferred semantics

Henry PrakkenChongqing

May 29, 2010

Page 2: Argumentation Logics Lecture 3: Abstract argumentation preferred semantics

Contents Review of stable semantics

Definitions A problem

Preferred semantics Labelling-based Extension-based

Abstract argumentation: general remarks on semantics

Page 3: Argumentation Logics Lecture 3: Abstract argumentation preferred semantics

Status of arguments: abstract semantics (Dung 1995)

INPUT: an abstract argumentation theory AAT = Args,Defeat

OUTPUT: An assignment of the status ‘in’ or ‘out’ to all members of Args So: semantics specifies conditions for

labeling the ‘argument graph’. Should capture reinstatement:A B C

Page 4: Argumentation Logics Lecture 3: Abstract argumentation preferred semantics

Possible labeling conditions Every argument is either ‘in’ or ‘out’.

1. An argument is ‘in’ iff all arguments defeating it are ‘out’.

2. An argument is ‘out’ iff it is defeated by an argument that is ‘in’.

Works fine with:

But not with:

A B C

A B

Page 5: Argumentation Logics Lecture 3: Abstract argumentation preferred semantics

Two solutions Change conditions so that always a unique status

assignment results

Use multiple status assignments:

and

A B C

A BA B

A B C

A B

Page 6: Argumentation Logics Lecture 3: Abstract argumentation preferred semantics

A problem(?) with grounded semantics

We have: We want(?):

A B

C

D

A B

C

D

Page 7: Argumentation Logics Lecture 3: Abstract argumentation preferred semantics

Multiple labellings

A B

C

D

A B

C

D

Page 8: Argumentation Logics Lecture 3: Abstract argumentation preferred semantics

Stable status assignments (Below is AAT = Args,Defeat implicit) A stable status assignment is a partition of Args

into sets In and Out such that:1. An argument is in In iff all arguments defeating it are

in Out.2. An argument is in Out iff it is defeated by an

argument that is in In.

A is justified if A is In in all s.a. A is overruled if A is Out in all s.a. A is defensible if A is In in some but not all s.a.

Page 9: Argumentation Logics Lecture 3: Abstract argumentation preferred semantics

Stable extensions Dung (1995):

S is conflict-free if no member of S defeats a member of S

S is a stable extension if it is conflict-free and defeats all arguments outside it

Now: S is a stable argument extension if (In,Out) is a

stable status assignment and S = In.

Proposition 4.3.4: S is a stable argument extension iff S is a stable extension

Page 10: Argumentation Logics Lecture 3: Abstract argumentation preferred semantics

Stable status assignments:a problem

A stable status assignment is a partition of Args into sets In and Out such that:1. An argument is in In iff all arguments

defeating it are in Out.2. An argument is in Out iff it is defeated by

an argument that is in In.

A B

C

Page 11: Argumentation Logics Lecture 3: Abstract argumentation preferred semantics

Stable status assignments:a problem

A stable status assignment is a partition of Args into sets In and Out such that:1. An argument is in In iff all arguments

defeating it are in Out.2. An argument is in Out iff it is defeated by

an argument that is in In.

A B

C

Page 12: Argumentation Logics Lecture 3: Abstract argumentation preferred semantics

Stable status assignments:a problem

A stable status assignment is a partition of Args into sets In and Out such that:1. An argument is in In iff all arguments

defeating it are in Out.2. An argument is in Out iff it is defeated by

an argument that is in In.

A B

C

Page 13: Argumentation Logics Lecture 3: Abstract argumentation preferred semantics

Stable status assignments:a problem

A stable status assignment is a partition of Args into sets In and Out such that:1. An argument is in In iff all arguments

defeating it are in Out.2. An argument is in Out iff it is defeated by

an argument that is in In.

A B

C

Page 14: Argumentation Logics Lecture 3: Abstract argumentation preferred semantics

Stable status assignments:a problem

A stable status assignment is a partition of Args into sets In and Out such that:1. An argument is in In iff all arguments

defeating it are in Out.2. An argument is in Out iff it is defeated by

an argument that is in In.

A B

C

Page 15: Argumentation Logics Lecture 3: Abstract argumentation preferred semantics

Status assignments A status assignment assigns to zero or more members of

Args either the status In or Out (but not both) such that:1. An argument is in In iff all arguments defeating it are in Out.2. An argument is in Out iff it is defeated by an argument that is in

In.

Let Undecided = Args / (In Out): A status assignment is stable if Undecided = .

In is a stable argument extension A status assignment is preferred if Undecided is -minimal.

In is a preferred argument extension A status assignment is grounded if Undecided is -maximal.

In is the grounded argument extension

Page 16: Argumentation Logics Lecture 3: Abstract argumentation preferred semantics

A B

C D E

1. An argument is In iff all arguments defeating it are Out.2. An argument is Out iff it is defeated by an argument that is In.

Grounded s.a. minimise node colouring Preferred s.a maximise node colouring

Page 17: Argumentation Logics Lecture 3: Abstract argumentation preferred semantics

Preferred extensions Dung (1995):

S is conflict-free if no member of S defeats a member of S S is admissible if it is conflict-free and all its members are

acceptable wrt S S is a preferred extension if it is -maximally admissible

Recall: S is a preferred (grounded) argument extension if (In,Out)

is a preferred (grounded) status assignment and S = In.

Proposition 4.3.13(16): S is a preferred (grounded) argument extension iff S is a preferred (grounded) extension

Page 18: Argumentation Logics Lecture 3: Abstract argumentation preferred semantics

A B

C D E

S defends A if all defeaters of A are defeated by a member of S

S is admissible if it is conflict-free and defends all its members

Admissible?

Page 19: Argumentation Logics Lecture 3: Abstract argumentation preferred semantics

A B

C D E

S defends A if all defeaters of A are defeated by a member of S

S is admissible if it is conflict-free and defends all its members

Admissible?

Page 20: Argumentation Logics Lecture 3: Abstract argumentation preferred semantics

A B

C D E

S defends A if all defeaters of A are defeated by a member of S

S is admissible if it is conflict-free and defends all its members

Admissible?

Page 21: Argumentation Logics Lecture 3: Abstract argumentation preferred semantics

A B

C D E

S defends A if all defeaters of A are defeated by a member of S

S is admissible if it is conflict-free and defends all its members

Admissible?

Page 22: Argumentation Logics Lecture 3: Abstract argumentation preferred semantics

A B

C D E

S defends A if all defeaters of A are defeated by a member of S

S is admissible if it is conflict-free and defends all its members

Preferred? S is preferred if it is maximally admissible

Page 23: Argumentation Logics Lecture 3: Abstract argumentation preferred semantics

A B

C D E

S defends A if all defeaters of A are defeated by a member of S

S is admissible if it is conflict-free and defends all its members

Preferred? S is preferred if it is maximally admissible

Page 24: Argumentation Logics Lecture 3: Abstract argumentation preferred semantics

A B

C D E

S defends A if all defeaters of A are defeated by a member of S

S is admissible if it is conflict-free and defends all its members

Preferred? S is preferred if it is maximally admissible

Page 25: Argumentation Logics Lecture 3: Abstract argumentation preferred semantics

A B

C D E

S defends A if all defeaters of A are defeated by a member of S

S is admissible if it is conflict-free and defends all its members

Grounded? S is groundeded if it is the smallest set s.t. A S iff S defends A

Page 26: Argumentation Logics Lecture 3: Abstract argumentation preferred semantics

A B

C D E

S defends A if all defeaters of A are defeated by a member of S

S is admissible if it is conflict-free and defends all its members

Grounded? S is groundeded if it is the smallest set s.t. A S iff S defends A

Page 27: Argumentation Logics Lecture 3: Abstract argumentation preferred semantics

A B

C D E

1. An argument is In if all arguments defeating it are Out.2. An argument is Out if it is defeated by an argument that is In.

F

Page 28: Argumentation Logics Lecture 3: Abstract argumentation preferred semantics

Properties Every admissible set is included in a preferred

extension The grounded extension is unique Every stable extension is preferred (but not v.v.) There exists at least one preferred extension The grounded extension is a subset of all preferred

and stable extensions Every AAT without infinite defeat paths has a unique

extension (which is the same in all semantics) Every AAT without odd defeat cycles has a stable

extension ...

Page 29: Argumentation Logics Lecture 3: Abstract argumentation preferred semantics

Self-defeating arguments again

Recall: A is justified if A is In in all s/p/g.s.a. A is overruled if A is Out in all s/p/g.s.a. A is defensible if A is In in some but not in

all s/p/g.s.a.

In grounded and preferred semantics self-defeating arguments are not always overruled

They can make that there are no stable extensions