Argumentation Semantics for Defeasible Logic

Abstract

Defeasible reasoning is a simple but efficient rule-based approach to nonmonotonic reasoning. It has powerful implementations and shows promise to be applied in the areas of legal reasoning and the modeling of business rules. This paper establishes significant links between defeasible reasoning and argumentation. In particular, Dung-like argumentation semantics is provided for two key defeasible logics, of which one is ambiguity propagating and the other ambiguity blocking.There are several reasons for the significance of this work: (a) establishing links between formal systems leads to a better understanding and cross-fertilization, in particular our work sheds light on the argumentation-theoretic features of defeasible logic; (b) we provide the first ambiguity blocking Dunglike argumentation system; (c) defeasible reasoning may provide an efficient implementation platform for systems of argumentation; and (d) argumentation-based semantics support a deeper understanding of defeasible reasoning, especially in the context of the intended applications.

Sequent-based logical argumentation

“…Different approaches to logical argumentation have been introduced in the literature, including formalisms that are based on classical logic (Besnard & Hunter, 2001, defeasible reasoning (Governatori, Maher, Antoniou, & Billington, 2004;Pollock, 1991Pollock, , 1995Simari & Loui, 1992) abstract argumentation and the ASPIC + framework (Modgil & Prakken, 2014;Prakken, 2010), assumption-based argumentation (Dung, Kowalski, & Toni, 2006), default logic (Prakken, 1993), situation calculus (Brewka, 2001), and so forth.…”

Proof Theories and Algorithms for Abstract Argumentation Frameworks

“…With regard to the argument game approach, we recall that Dung's abstract argumentation semantics can be understood as a semantics for a number of nonmonotonic and defeasible logics [3,12,16], in the sense that:…”

An abstract framework for argumentation with structured arguments

“…DL is not explicitly argumentbased but defines the notion of a proof tree, which interleaves support and attack. Governatori et al (2004) investigate the relation with Dung-style semantics. One variant of DL is proven to instantiate grounded semantics.…”