Abstract
Argumentation in AI provides an inconsistency-tolerant formalism capable of establishing those pieces of knowledge that can be warranted despite having information in contradiction. Computation of warrant tends to be expensive; in order to alleviate this issue, we propose a heuristics-based pruning technique over dialectical trees. Empirical testing shows that in most cases our approach answers queries much faster than the usual techniques, which prune with no guide.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Preview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Amgoud, L., Devred, C., Lagasquie, M.C.: A constrained argumentation system for practical reasoning. In: AAMAS 2008: Proceedings of the 7th International Joint Conference on Autonomous Agents and Multiagent Systems (May 12-16 (2008)
Baroni, P., Dunne, P.E., Giacomin, M.: Computational properties of resolution-based grounded semantics. In: IJCAI, pp. 683–689 (2009)
Baroni, P., Giacomin, M.: On Principle-Based Evaluation of Extension-Based Argumentation Semantics. Artif. Intell. 171, 675–700 (2007)
Bench-Capon, T.J.M., Dunne, P.E.: Argumentation in artificial intelligence. Artif. Intell. 171, 619–641 (2007)
Besnard, P., Hunter, A.: A logic-based theory of deductive arguments. Artif. Intell. 128(1-2), 203–235 (2001)
Besnard, P., Hunter, A.: Knowledgebase compilation for efficient logical argumentation. In: KR, pp. 123–133 (2006)
Boella, G., Kaci, S., van der Torre, L.: Dynamics in argumentation with single extensions: Abstraction principles and the grounded extension. In: Sossai, C., Chemello, G. (eds.) ECSQARU 2009. LNCS, vol. 5590, pp. 107–118. Springer, Heidelberg (2009)
Capobianco, M., Chesñevar, C.I., Simari, G.R.: Argumentation and the dynamics of warranted beliefs in changing environments. JAAMAS 11, 127–151 (2005)
Chesñevar, C.I., Simari, G.R., García, A.J.: Pruning search space in defeasible argumentation. In: ATAI, pp. 46–55 (2000)
Dung, P.M.: On the acceptability of arguments and its fundamental role in nonmonotonic reasoning, logic programming and n-person games. Artif. Intell. 77(2), 321–358 (1995)
García, A.J., Simari, G.R.: Defeasible logic programming: An argumentative approach. TPLP 4(1-2), 95–138 (2004)
Matt, P.A., Toni, F.: A game-theoretic measure of argument strength for abstract argumentation. In: JELIA, pp. 285–297 (2008)
Chesñevar, C.I., Simari, G.R., Godo, L.: Computing dialectical trees efficiently in possibilistic defeasible logic programming. In: Baral, C., Greco, G., Leone, N., Terracina, G. (eds.) LPNMR 2005. LNCS (LNAI), vol. 3662, pp. 158–171. Springer, Heidelberg (2005)
Rahwan, I.: Mass argumentation and the semantic web. Journal of Web Semantics 6(1), 29–37 (2008)
Rotstein, N., Moguillansky, M., García, A., Simari, G.: A Dynamic Argumentation Framework. In: COMMA, pp. 427–438 (2010)
Rotstein, N.D., Moguillansky, M.O., Simari, G.R.: Dialectical abstract argumentation: A characterization of the marking criterion. In: IJCAI, pp. 898–903 (2009)
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2011 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg
About this paper
Cite this paper
Rotstein, N.D., Gottifredi, S., García, A.J., Simari, G.R. (2011). A Heuristics-Based Pruning Technique for Argumentation Trees. In: Benferhat, S., Grant, J. (eds) Scalable Uncertainty Management. SUM 2011. Lecture Notes in Computer Science(), vol 6929. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-23963-2_15
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-23963-2_15
Publisher Name: Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg
Print ISBN: 978-3-642-23962-5
Online ISBN: 978-3-642-23963-2
eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)