Abstract Dialectical Frameworks (ADFs) are argumentation frameworks where each node is associated with an acceptance condition. This allows us to model different types of dependencies as supports and attacks. Previous studies provided a translation from Normal Logic Programs (NLPs) to ADFs and proved the stable models semantics for a normal logic program has an equivalent semantics to that of the corresponding ADF. However, these studies failed in identifying a semantics for ADFs equivalent to a three-valued semantics (as partial stable models and well-founded models) for NLPs. In this work, we focus on a fragment of ADFs, called Attacking Dialectical Frameworks (ADF$^+$s), and provide a translation from NLPs to ADF$^+$s robust enough to guarantee the equivalence between partial stable models, well-founded models, regular models, stable models semantics for NLPs and respectively complete models, grounded models, preferred models, stable models for ADFs. In addition, we define a new semantics for ADF$^+$s, called L-stable, and show it is equivalent to the L-stable semantics for NLPs. This paper is under consideration for acceptance in TPLP.
Abstract dialectical frameworks (ADFs) have been introduced as a formalism for modeling and evaluating argumentation allowing general logical satisfaction conditions. Different criteria used to settle the acceptance of arguments are called semantics. Semantics of ADFs have so far mainly been defined based on the concept of admissibility. However, the notion of strongly admissible semantics studied for abstract argumentation frameworks has not yet been introduced for ADFs. In the current work we present the concept of strong admissibility of interpretations for ADFs. Further, we show that stron…
An Encoding of Abstract Dialectical Frameworks into Higher-Order Logic
University of Luxembourg, Department of Computer Science（卢森堡大学计算机科学系）；Universität Greifswald, Institut für Mathematik und Informatik（格赖夫斯瓦尔德大学数学与信息学研究所）
Labelling-based formal argumentation relies on labelling functions that typically assign one of 3 labels to indicate either acceptance, rejection, or else undecided-to-be-either, to each argument. While a classical labelling-based approach applies globally uniform conditions as to how an argument is to be labelled, they can be determined more locally per argument. Abstract dialectical frameworks (ADF) is a well-known argumentation formalism that belongs to this category, offering a greater labelling flexibility. As the size of an argumentation increases in the numbers of arguments and argument…
We present an approach for representing abstract argumentation frameworks based on an encoding into classical higher-order logic. This provides a uniform framework for computer-assisted assessment of abstract argumentation frameworks using interactive and automated reasoning tools. This enables the formal analysis and verification of meta-theoretical properties as well as the flexible generation of extensions and labellings with respect to well-known argumentation semantics.
University of Nebraska Omaha（内布拉斯加大学奥马哈分校）；IRIT（图卢兹计算机科学研究所）；Université de Toulouse（图卢兹大学）；CNRS（法国国家科学研究中心）
In this work, we show that both logic programming and abstract argumentation frameworks can be interpreted in terms of Nelson's constructive logic N4. We do so by formalizing, in this logic, two principles that we call non-contradictory inference and strengthened closed world assumption: the first states that no belief can be held based on contradictory evidence while the latter forces both unknown and contradictory evidence to be regarded as false. Using these principles, both logic programming and abstract argumentation frameworks are translated into constructive logic in a modular way and u…
Recently there has been an increasing interest in frameworks extending Dung's abstract Argumentation Framework (AF). Popular extensions include bipolar AFs and AFs with recursive attacks and necessary supports. Although the relationships between AF semantics and Partial Stable Models (PSMs) of logic programs has been deeply investigated, this is not the case for more general frameworks extending AF. In this paper we explore the relationships between AF-based frameworks and PSMs. We show that every AF-based framework $Δ$ can be translated into a logic program $P_Δ$ so that the extensions prescr…
Institute for Web Science and Technologies（网络科学与技术研究所）；University of Koblenz-Landau（科布伦茨-兰道大学）
We propose a novel ranking-based semantics for Dung-style argumentation frameworks with the help of conditional logics. Using an intuitive translation for an argumentation framework to generate conditionals, we can apply nonmonotonic inference systems to generate a ranking on possible worlds. With this ranking we construct a ranking for our arguments. With a small extension to this ranking-based semantics we already satisfy some desirable properties for a ranking over arguments.
LogiCity: Advancing Neuro-Symbolic AI with Abstract Urban Simulation
Carnegie Mellon University（卡内基梅隆大学）；University of Toronto（多伦多大学）；University at Buffalo（布法罗大学）；University of Pennsylvania（宾夕法尼亚大学）；Centaur AI Institute（半人马人工智能研究所）；Mila（米拉研究所）
Generalizing the attack structure in argumentation frameworks (AFs) has been studied in different ways. Most prominently, the binary attack relation of Dung frameworks has been extended to the notion of collective attacks. The resulting formalism is often termed SETAFs. Another approach is provided via abstract dialectical frameworks (ADFs), where acceptance conditions specify the relation between arguments; restricting these conditions naturally allows for so-called support-free ADFs. The aim of the paper is to shed light on the relation between these two different approaches. To this end, we…
Interpretable and Explainable Logical Policies via Neurally Guided Symbolic Abstraction
Technical University of Darmstadt（达姆施塔特工业大学）；National Research Center for Applied Cybersecurity（国家应用网络安全研究中心）；Eindhoven University of Technology（埃因霍温理工大学）；Hessian Center for AI (hessian.AI)（黑森人工智能中心）；German Research Center for AI (DFKI)（德国人工智能研究中心）
Epistemic logics typically talk about knowledge of individual agents or groups of explicitly listed agents. Often, however, one wishes to express knowledge of groups of agents specified by a given property, as in `it is common knowledge among economists'. We introduce such a logic of common knowledge, which we term abstract-group epistemic logic (AGEL). That is, AGEL features a common knowledge operator for groups of agents given by concepts in a separate agent logic that we keep generic, with one possible agent logic being ALC. We show that AGEL is EXPTIME-complete, with the lower bound estab…
Korea Advanced Institute of Science and Technology (KAIST)（韩国科学技术院）；Mohamed bin Zayed University of Artificial Intelligence (MBZUAI)（穆罕默德·本·扎耶德人工智能大学）
Abstract reasoning, i.e., inferring complicated patterns from given observations, is a central building block of artificial general intelligence. While humans find the answer by either eliminating wrong candidates or first constructing the answer, prior deep neural network (DNN)-based methods focus on the former discriminative approach. This paper aims to design a framework for the latter approach and bridge the gap between artificial and human intelligence. To this end, we propose logic-guided generation (LoGe), a novel generative DNN framework that reduces abstract reasoning as an optimizati…
Abstract Meaning Representation-Based Logic-Driven Data Augmentation for Logical Reasoning
Strong AI Lab, NAOInstitute, Waipapa Taumata Rau - The University of Auckland（强人工智能实验室、NAO研究所、怀帕帕·陶马陶·劳 - 奥克兰大学）；Xtracta, New Zealand（新西兰Xtracta公司）；University of Cambridge, UK（英国剑桥大学）；Sun Yat-Sen University, China（中国中山大学）；The University of Auckland, New Zealand（新西兰奥克兰大学）
