Non-flat ABA Is an Instance of Bipolar Argumentation

Authors

  • Markus Ulbricht Leipzig University
  • Nico Potyka Cardiff University
  • Anna Rapberger Imperial College London
  • Francesca Toni Imperial College London

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.1609/aaai.v38i9.28944

Keywords:

KRR: Argumentation, KRR: Computational Complexity of Reasoning, KRR: Nonmonotonic Reasoning

Abstract

Assumption-based Argumentation (ABA) is a well-known structured argumentation formalism, whereby arguments and attacks between them are drawn from rules, defeasible assumptions and their contraries. A common restriction imposed on ABA frameworks (ABAFs) is that they are flat, i.e. each of the defeasible assumptions can only be assumed, but not derived. While it is known that flat ABAFs can be translated into abstract argumentation frameworks (AFs) as proposed by Dung, no translation exists from general, possibly non-flat ABAFs into any kind of abstract argumentation formalism. In this paper, we close this gap and show that bipolar AFs (BAFs) can instantiate general ABAFs. To this end we develop suitable, novel BAF semantics which borrow from the notion of deductive support. We investigate basic properties of our BAFs, including computational complexity, and prove the desired relation to ABAFs under several semantics.

Downloads

Published

2024-03-24

How to Cite

Ulbricht, M., Potyka, N., Rapberger, A., & Toni, F. (2024). Non-flat ABA Is an Instance of Bipolar Argumentation. Proceedings of the AAAI Conference on Artificial Intelligence, 38(9), 10723-10731. https://doi.org/10.1609/aaai.v38i9.28944

Issue

Section

AAAI Technical Track on Knowledge Representation and Reasoning