Skip to main content
Springer Nature Link
Log in

Interlinking Logic Programs and Argumentation Frameworks

  • Conference paper
  • First Online:
Logic Programming and Nonmonotonic Reasoning (LPNMR 2022)

Part of the book series: Lecture Notes in Computer Science ((LNAI,volume 13416))

  • 704 Accesses

Abstract

Logic programs (LPs) and argumentation frameworks (AFs) are two declarative knowledge representation (KR) formalisms used for different reasoning tasks. The purpose of this study is interlinking two different reasoning components. To this end, we introduce two frameworks: LPAF and AFLP. The former enables to use the result of argumentation in AF for reasoning in LP, while the latter enables to use the result of reasoning in LP for arguing in AF. These frameworks are extended to bidirectional frameworks in which AF and LP can exchange information with each other. We also investigate their connection to several general KR frameworks from the literature.

The second author has been partial supported by NSF grants 1914635, 1757207, 1812628.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution

Subscribe and save

Springer+ Basic
$34.99 /Month
  • Get 10 units per month
  • Download Article/Chapter or eBook
  • 1 Unit = 1 Article or 1 Chapter
  • Cancel anytime
Subscribe now

Buy Now

Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 59.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 79.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. 1.

    We assume readers’ familiarity with the stable model semantics [11, 14] and the well-founded semantics [16]

  2. 2.

    Note that an AF extension represents whether an argument is accepted or not. If an argument a is not in an extension E, a is not accepted in E. Then \(not\,a\) in LP becomes true by NAF.

  3. 3.

    We consider the well-founded model as the set of true atoms under the well-founded semantics.

References

  1. Baumann, R.: Context-free and context-sensitive kernels: update and deletion equivalence in abstract argumentation. In: Proceedings of the ECAI 2014, pp. 63–68. IOS Press (2014)

    Google Scholar 

  2. Besnard, P., Hunter, A.: Constructing argument graphs with deductive arguments: a tutorial. Argum. Comput. 5(1), 5–30 (2014)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Bodanza, G., Tohmé, F., Auday, M.: Collective argumentation: a survey of aggregation issues around argumentation frameworks. Argum. Comput. 8(1), 1–34 (2017)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Brewka, G., Eiter, T.: Equilibria in heterogeneous nonmonotonic multi-context systems. In: AAAI’07, pp. 385–390 (2007)

    Google Scholar 

  5. Caminada, M., Sá, S., Alcântara, J., Dvor̆ák, W.: On the equivalence between logic programming semantics and argumentation semantics. J. Approx. Reason. 58, 87–111 (2015)

    Google Scholar 

  6. Dung, P.M.: On the acceptability of arguments and its fundamental role in nonmonotonic reasoning, logic programming and \(n\)-person games. Artif. Intell. 77, 321–357 (1995)

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  7. Dung, P.M., Kowalski, R.A., Toni, F.: Assumption-based argumentation. In: Rahwan, I., Simari, G.R. (Eds.) Argumentation in Artificial Intelligence, pp. 199–218. Springer, Boston (2009). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-0-387-98197-0_10

  8. Dvorák, W., Dunne, P.E.: Computational problems in formal argumentation and their complexity. In: Handbook of Formal Argumentation, pp. 631–688. College Publications (2018)

    Google Scholar 

  9. Eiter, T., Leone, N., Saccá, D.: Expressive power and complexity of partial models for disjunctive deductive databases. Theor. Comput. Sci. 206, 181–218 (1998)

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  10. Eiter, T., Fink, M., Woltran, S.: Semantical characterizations and complexity of equivalences in answer set programming. ACM TOCL 8(3), 17 (2007)

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  11. Gelfond, M., Lifschitz, V.: The stable model semantics for logic programming. In: Proceedings of the JICSLP, pp. 1070–1080. MIT Press (1988)

    Google Scholar 

  12. Hunter, A.: A probabilistic approach to modelling uncertain logical arguments. J. Approx. Reason. 54, 47–81 (2013)

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  13. Coste-Marquis, S., Devred, C., Marquis, P.: Constrained argumentation frameworks. In: Proceedings of the KR’06, pp. 112–122 (2006)

    Google Scholar 

  14. Przymusinski, T.C.: Stable semantics for disjunctive programs. New Gen. Comput. 9, 401–424 (1991)

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  15. Sakama, C., Son, T.C.: Interlinking logic programs and argumentation frameworks. In: Proceeding of the NMR-2021, pp. 305–314 (2021). https://sites.google.com/view/nmr2021/home

  16. Van Gelder, A., Ross, K., Schlipf, J.S.: The well-founded semantics for general logic programs. J. ACM 38, 620–650 (1991)

    MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Wakayama University, 930 Sakaedani, Wakayama, 640-8510, Japan

    Chiaki Sakama

  2. New Mexico State University, Las Cruces, NM, 88003, USA

    Tran Cao Son

Authors
  1. Chiaki Sakama
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Tran Cao Son
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Chiaki Sakama .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. University of Oxford, Oxford, UK

    Georg Gottlob

  2. Miami University, Oxford, OH, USA

    Daniela Inclezan

  3. University of Genova, Genoa, Italy

    Marco Maratea

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2022 The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG

About this paper

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this paper

Sakama, C., Son, T.C. (2022). Interlinking Logic Programs and Argumentation Frameworks. In: Gottlob, G., Inclezan, D., Maratea, M. (eds) Logic Programming and Nonmonotonic Reasoning. LPNMR 2022. Lecture Notes in Computer Science(), vol 13416. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-15707-3_25

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-15707-3_25

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-031-15706-6

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-031-15707-3

  • eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics