计算机科学 ›› 2017, Vol. 44 ›› Issue (4): 256-262.doi: 10.11896/j.issn.1002-137X.2017.04.054

• 人工智能 • 上一篇    下一篇

一种渐进式论辩语义的论证博弈模型

魏斌   

  1. 西南政法大学 重庆401120
  • 出版日期:2018-11-13 发布日期:2018-11-13
  • 基金资助:
    本文受重庆市教委科学技术项目(KJ1500103)资助

Argument Game Model for Gradual Argumentation Semantic

WEI Bin   

  • Online:2018-11-13 Published:2018-11-13

摘要: 在可计算论辩模型中,论辩语义的证明理论解决如何判定给定论辩语义中某个论证的证成状态的问题,这通常需要建构与之对应的论证博弈模型。论证博弈发生在正方和反方的论证交互过程中,正反双方都是通过给出攻击论证来质疑对方的论证和辩护己方的论证,正方只有在论证博弈中获胜才能使其初始论证获得确定的证成状态。文中定义了一种被称为BRD-论辩语义的渐进式论辩语义,不同于Dung的抽象论辩语义,它是在结构化论辩框架ASPIC+中嵌入了一种用于计算论证的强度和证成度的循环语义。为了给出该语义的证明理论,建构了与之对应的论证博弈模型。

关键词: 结构化论辩框架,渐进式论辩语义,论证博弈

Abstract: In formal argumentation theory,the proof theory of argumentation semantics sloves the problem of how to determine the status of justification of an argument in a given argumentation semantic,which always needs a corresponding argument game model.Argument game happens the process of argument interactions between a proponent and an opponent,and they both object and defense their arguments by giving attacking arguments,only if the proponent wins an argument game,its initial argument could obtain explicit status of justification.This paper defined a kind of gradual argumentation semantic,namely BRD-argumentation semantic,which is different from Dung’s abstract argumentation semantic,embeding a circular semantic for calculating the strengthes and degrees of justification of arguments into a structured argumentation framework ASPIC+.For sake of giving the proof theory of this semantic,this paper constructed a corresponding argument game model.

Key words: Structured argumentation framework,Gradual argumentation semantics,Argument game

[1] DUNG P M.On the Acceptability of Arguments and its Fund-mental Role in Nonmonotonic Reasoning,Logic Programming and N-person Games[J].Artificial Intelligence,1995,77(2):321-357.
[2] CAMINADA M,AMGOUD L.On the Evaluation of Argumen- tation Formalisms[J].Artificial Intelligence,2007,171(5/6):286-310.
[3] PRAKKEN H.An Abstract Framework for Argumentation withStructured Arguments[J].Argument and Computation,2010,3(1):93-124.
[4] MODGIL S J,PRAKKEN H.A General Account of Argumenta-tion with Preferences[J].Artificial Intelligence,2013,195(195):361-397.
[5] Most Cited Artificial Intelligence Articles .[2016-11-20].http://www.journals.elsevier.com/artificial-intellgence/most-cited-articles.
[6] BIN W,PRAKKEN H.An Analysis of Critical-link Semantics with Variable Degrees of Justification[J].Argument and Computation,2016,7(1):35-53.
[7] AMGOUND L,CAYROL C,LAGASQUIE C,et al.On Bipolari-ty in Argumentation Frameworks[J].International Journal of Intelligent Systems,2008,23(10):1062-1093.
[8] POLLOCK J L.Defeasible Reasoning with Variable Degrees of Justification[J].Artificial Intelligence,2002,133(1/2):233-282.
[9] GORDON T F,WALTON D.Proof Burdens and Standards[M]∥Rahwan I,Simari G R,eds.Argumentation in Artificial Intelligence.Springer,2009:239-260.
[10] JAKOBOVITS H,VERMEIR M.Robust Semantics for Argumentation Frameworks[J].Journal of Logic and Computation,1999,9(2):215-261.
[11] GAMINADA M,GABBAY D.A Logical Account of Formal Argumentation[J].Studia Logica,2009,93(2/3):109-145.
[12] WU Y N,CAMINADA M.A Labelling-Based Justification Status of Arguments[J].Studies in Logic,2010,3(4):12-29.
[13] 潘伟斌.曹操墓的考古学证明[N].中国社会科学报,2011-11-22(08).
[14] DUNG P M,KOWALSKI R A,TONI F.Dialectic Proof Procedures for Assumption-based,Admissible Argumentation [J].Artificial Intelligence,2006,170(2):114-159.
[15] VREESWIJK G,PRAKKEN H.Credulous and Sceptical Argument Games for Preferred Semantics[C]∥Proceedings of the 7th European Workshop on Logic for Arttficial Intelligence(JELIA-00).Springer,2000:239-253.

No related articles found!
Viewed
Full text


Abstract

Cited

  Shared   
  Discussed   
No Suggested Reading articles found!