{"type":"ScholarlyArticle","title":"An Efficient Algorithm for Skeptical Preferred Acceptance in Dynamic Argumentation Frameworks","authors":[{"name":"Gianvincenzo Alfano","slug":"gianvincenzo-alfano","given":"Gianvincenzo","family":"Alfano","affiliation":"Department of Informatics, Modeling, Electronics and System Engineering , University of Calabria , Italy"},{"name":"Sergio Greco","slug":"sergio-greco","given":"Sergio","family":"Greco","affiliation":"Department of Informatics, Modeling, Electronics and System Engineering , University of Calabria , Italy"},{"name":"Francesco Parisi","slug":"francesco-parisi","given":"Francesco","family":"Parisi","affiliation":"Department of Informatics, Modeling, Electronics and System Engineering , University of Calabria , Italy"}],"abstract":"Though there has been an extensive body of work on efficiently solving computational problems for static Dung's argumentation frameworks (AFs), little work has been done for handling dynamic AFs and in particular for deciding the skeptical acceptance of a given argument. In this paper we devise an efficient algorithm for computing the skeptical preferred acceptance in dynamic AFs. More specifically, we investigate how the skeptical acceptance of an argument (goal) evolves when the given AF is updated and propose an efficient algorithm for solving this problem. Our algorithm, called SPA, relies on two main ideas: i) computing a small portion of the input AF, called \"context-based\" AF, which is sufficient to determine the status of the goal in the updated AF, and ii) incrementally computing the ideal extension to further restrict the context-based AF. We experimentally show that SPA significantly outperforms the computation from scratch, and that the overhead of incrementally maintaining the ideal extension pays off as it speeds up the computation.","doi":"10.24963/ijcai.2019/3","url":"https://ijcai.org/proceedings/2019/3","pdf":"https://ijcai.org/proceedings/2019/0003.pdf","markdown":"https://ijcai.org/proceedings/2019/3.md","bibtex":"https://ijcai.org/proceedings/2019/bibtex/3","volume":{"slug":"2019","title":"Proceedings of the Twenty-Eighth International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence","short_title":"IJCAI 2019","url":"https://ijcai.org/proceedings/2019/","year":2019,"location":"Macao","dates":"10-16 August 2019","editors":"Sarit Kraus","isbn":"978-0-9992411-4-1","publisher":"International Joint Conferences on Artificial Intelligence Organization","doi_prefix":"10.24963/ijcai.2019"},"section":"Agent-based and Multi-agent Systems","track":"Main track","number":3,"pages":{"first":18,"last":24},"keywords":["Knowledge Representation and Reasoning: Computational Models of Argument","Agent-based and Multi-agent Systems: Agreement Technologies: Argumentation"],"videos":[],"references":[{"position":1,"raw":"[Alfano et al., 2017] Gianvincenzo Alfano, Sergio Greco, and Francesco Parisi. Efficient computation of extensions for dynamic abstract argumentation frameworks: An incre- mental approach. In IJCAI, pages 49-55, 2017.","title":"Efficient computation of extensions for dynamic abstract argumentation frameworks: An incremental approach","authors":"Alfano","year":"2017","venue":"IJCAI","doi":null,"url":null,"internal_url":"/proceedings/2017/8"},{"position":2,"raw":"[Alfano et al., 2019] Gianvincenzo Alfano, Sergio Greco, and Francesco Parisi. On scaling the enumeration of the preferred extensions of abstract argumentation frame- works. In SAC, pages 1147-1153, 2019.","title":"On scaling the enumeration of the preferred extensions of abstract argumentation frameworks","authors":"Alfano","year":"2019","venue":"SAC","doi":null,"url":null,"internal_url":null},{"position":3,"raw":"[Alviano, 2017] Mario Alviano. The pyglaf argumentation reasoner. In ICLP, pages 2:1-2:3, 2017.","title":"The pyglaf argumentation reasoner","authors":"Mario Alviano","year":"2017","venue":"ICLP","doi":null,"url":null,"internal_url":null},{"position":4,"raw":"[Amgoud and Vesic, 2012] Leila Amgoud and Srdjan Vesic. Revising option status in argument-based decision sys- tems. J. Log. Comput., 22(5):1019-1058, 2012.","title":"Leila Amgoud and Srdjan Vesic. Revising option status in argument-based decision systems","authors":"Vesic Amgoud","year":"2012","venue":"J. Log. Comput","doi":null,"url":null,"internal_url":null},{"position":5,"raw":"[Baroni et al., 2005] Pietro Baroni, Massimiliano Giacomin, and Giovanni Guida. SCC-recursiveness: a general schema for argumentation semantics. Artif. Intell., 168(1- 2):162-210, 2005.","title":"SCC-recursiveness: a general schema for argumentation semantics","authors":"Pietro Baroni, Massimiliano Giacomin, Giovanni Guida","year":"2005","venue":"Artif. Intell","doi":null,"url":null,"internal_url":null},{"position":6,"raw":"[Baroni et al., 2011] Pietro Baroni, Martin Caminada, and Massimiliano Giacomin. An introduction to argumen- tation semantics. The Knowledge Engineering Review, 26(4):365-410, 2011.","title":"An introduction to argumentation semantics","authors":"Pietro Baroni, Martin Caminada, Massimiliano Giacomin","year":"2011","venue":"The Knowledge Engineering Review","doi":null,"url":null,"internal_url":null},{"position":7,"raw":"[Baroni et al., 2014] Pietro Baroni, Massimiliano Giacomin, and Beishui Liao. On topology-related properties of ab- stract argumentation semantics. A correction and exten- sion to dynamics of argumentation systems: A division- based method. Artif. Intell., 212:104-115, 2014.","title":"On topology-related properties of abstract argumentation semantics. A correction and extension to dynamics of argumentation systems: A divisionbased method","authors":"Pietro Baroni, Massimiliano Giacomin, Beishui Liao","year":"2014","venue":"Artif. Intell","doi":null,"url":null,"internal_url":null},{"position":8,"raw":"[Baumann and Brewka, 2010] Ringo Baumann and Gerhard Brewka. Expanding argumentation frameworks: Enforc- ing and monotonicity results. In COMMA, pages 75-86, 2010.","title":"Expanding argumentation frameworks: Enforcing and monotonicity results","authors":"Brewka Baumann, Ringo Baumann, Gerhard Brewka","year":"2010","venue":"COMMA","doi":null,"url":null,"internal_url":null},{"position":9,"raw":"[Baumann, 2011] Ringo Baumann. Splitting an argumenta- tion framework. In LPNMR, pages 40-53, 2011.","title":"Splitting an argumentation framework","authors":"Ringo Baumann, Baumann","year":"2011","venue":"LPNMR","doi":null,"url":null,"internal_url":null},{"position":10,"raw":"[Bench-Capon and Dunne, 2007] Trevor J. M. Bench-Capon and Paul E. Dunne. Argumentation in AI. Artif. Intell., 171(10-15):619 -641, 2007.","title":"Argumentation in AI","authors":"J M Trevor, Paul E Bench-Capon, Dunne","year":"2007","venue":"Artif. Intell","doi":null,"url":null,"internal_url":null},{"position":11,"raw":"[Bisquert et al., 2013] Pierre Bisquert, Claudette Cayrol, Florence Dupin de Saint-Cyr, and Marie-Christine Lagasquie-Schiex. Characterizing change in abstract ar- gumentation systems. In Trends in Belief Revision and Ar- gumentation Dynamics, volume 48, pages 75-102. 2013.","title":"Characterizing change in abstract argumentation systems","authors":"Bisquert","year":"2013","venue":"Trends in Belief Revision and Argumentation Dynamics","doi":null,"url":null,"internal_url":null},{"position":12,"raw":"[Bistarelli et al., 2018a] Stefano Bistarelli, Francesco Faloci, Francesco Santini, and Carlo Taticchi. Studying dynamics in argumentation with Rob. In COMMA, pages 451-452, 2018.","title":"Studying dynamics in argumentation with Rob","authors":"Bistarelli","year":"2018","venue":"COMMA","doi":null,"url":null,"internal_url":null},{"position":13,"raw":"[Bistarelli et al., 2018b] Stefano Bistarelli, Lars Kotthoff, Francesco Santini, and Carlo Taticchi. Containerisation and dynamic frameworks in ICCMA'19. In SAFA Work- shop co-located with COMMA, pages 4-9, 2018.","title":"Containerisation and dynamic frameworks in ICCMA'19","authors":"Bistarelli","year":"2018","venue":"SAFA Workshop co-located with COMMA","doi":null,"url":null,"internal_url":null},{"position":14,"raw":"[Boella et al., 2009] Guido Boella, Souhila Kaci, and Leen- dert W. N. van der Torre. Dynamics in argumentation with single extensions: Abstraction principles and the grounded extension. In ECSQARU, pages 107-118, 2009.","title":"Dynamics in argumentation with single extensions: Abstraction principles and the grounded extension","authors":"Guido Boella, Souhila Kaci, Leendert W N Van Der Torre","year":"2009","venue":"ECSQARU","doi":null,"url":null,"internal_url":null},{"position":15,"raw":"[Caminada et al., 2016] Martin W. A. Caminada, Wolfgang Dvorák, and Srdjan Vesic. Preferred semantics as socratic discussion. J. Log. Comput., 26(4):1257-1292, 2016.","title":"Preferred semantics as socratic discussion","authors":"W A Martin, Wolfgang Caminada, Srdjan Dvorák, Vesic","year":"2016","venue":"J. Log. Comput","doi":null,"url":null,"internal_url":null},{"position":16,"raw":"[Cayrol et al., 2008] Claudette Cayrol, Florence Dupin de Saint-Cyr, and Marie-Christine Lagasquie-Schiex. Revision of an argumentation system. In KR, pages 124-134, 2008.","title":"Revision of an argumentation system","authors":"Claudette Cayrol, Florence Dupin De Saint-Cyr, Marie-Christine Lagasquie-Schiex","year":"2008","venue":null,"doi":null,"url":null,"internal_url":null},{"position":17,"raw":"[Cerutti et al., 2014] Federico Cerutti, Massimiliano Gia- comin, and Mauro Vallati. ArgSemSAT: Solving argumen- tation problems using SAT. In COMMA, pages 455-456, 2014.","title":"ArgSemSAT: Solving argumentation problems using SAT","authors":"Federico Cerutti, Massimiliano Giacomin, Mauro Vallati","year":"2014","venue":"COMMA","doi":null,"url":null,"internal_url":null},{"position":18,"raw":"[Charwat et al., 2015] Günther Charwat, Wolfgang Dvorák, Sarah Alice Gaggl, Johannes Peter Wallner, and Stefan Woltran. Methods for solving reasoning problems in ab- stract argumentation -A survey. Artif. Intell., 220:28-63, 2015.","title":"Methods for solving reasoning problems in abstract argumentation -A survey","authors":"Charwat","year":"2015","venue":"Artif. Intell","doi":null,"url":null,"internal_url":null},{"position":19,"raw":"[Doutre and Mailly, 2018] Sylvie Doutre and Jean-Guy Mailly. Constraints and changes: A survey of abstract argumentation dynamics. Argument & Computation, 9(3):223-248, 2018.","title":"Constraints and changes: A survey of abstract argumentation dynamics","authors":"Mailly Doutre, Sylvie Doutre, Jean-Guy Mailly","year":"2018","venue":"Argument & Computation","doi":null,"url":null,"internal_url":null},{"position":20,"raw":"[Dung et al., 2007] Phan Minh Dung, Paolo Mancarella, and Francesca Toni. Computing ideal sceptical argumentation. Artif. Intell., 171(10-15):642-674, 2007.","title":"Computing ideal sceptical argumentation","authors":"Minh Phan, Paolo Dung, Francesca Mancarella, Toni","year":"2007","venue":"Artif. Intell","doi":null,"url":null,"internal_url":null},{"position":21,"raw":"[Dung, 1995] Phan Minh Dung. On the acceptability of ar- guments and its fundamental role in nonmonotonic reason- ing, logic programming and n-person games. Artif. Intell., 77(2):321-358, 1995.","title":"On the acceptability of arguments and its fundamental role in nonmonotonic reasoning, logic programming and n-person games","authors":"Dung ; Phan, Minh Dung","year":"1995","venue":"Artif. Intell","doi":null,"url":null,"internal_url":null},{"position":22,"raw":"[Dunne and Wooldridge, 2009] Paul E. Dunne and Michael Wooldridge. Complexity of abstract argumentation. In Argumentation in AI, pages 85-104. 2009.","title":"Complexity of abstract argumentation","authors":"Paul E Dunne, Michael Wooldridge","year":"2009","venue":"Argumentation in AI","doi":null,"url":null,"internal_url":null},{"position":23,"raw":"[Dunne et al., 2016] Paul E. Dunne, Christof Spanring, Thomas Linsbichler, and Stefan Woltran. Investigating the relationship between argumentation semantics via signa- tures. In IJCAI, pages 1051-1057, 2016.","title":"Investigating the relationship between argumentation semantics via signatures","authors":"Paul E Dunne, Christof Spanring, Thomas Linsbichler, Stefan Woltran","year":"2016","venue":"IJCAI","doi":null,"url":null,"internal_url":null},{"position":24,"raw":"[Dunne, 2009] Paul E. Dunne. The computational complex- ity of ideal semantics. Artif. Intell., 173(18):1559-1591, 2009.","title":"The computational complexity of ideal semantics","authors":"Paul E Dunne","year":"2009","venue":"Artif. Intell","doi":null,"url":null,"internal_url":null},{"position":25,"raw":"[Falappa et al., 2011] Marcelo A. Falappa, Alejandro Javier Garcia, Gabriele Kern-Isberner, and Guillermo Ricardo Simari. On the evolving relation between belief revision and argumentation. The Knowledge Engineering Review, 26(1):35-43, 2011.","title":"On the evolving relation between belief revision and argumentation","authors":"Marcelo A Falappa, Alejandro Javier Garcia, Gabriele Kern-Isberner, Guillermo Ricardo Simari","year":"2011","venue":"The Knowledge Engineering Review","doi":null,"url":null,"internal_url":null},{"position":26,"raw":"[Greco and Parisi, 2016a] Sergio Greco and Francesco Parisi. Efficient computation of deterministic extensions for dynamic abstract argumentation frameworks. In ECAI, pages 1668-1669, 2016.","title":"Efficient computation of deterministic extensions for dynamic abstract argumentation frameworks","authors":"Parisi Greco, Sergio Greco, Francesco Parisi","year":"2016","venue":"ECAI","doi":null,"url":null,"internal_url":null},{"position":27,"raw":"[Greco and Parisi, 2016b] Sergio Greco and Francesco Parisi. Incremental computation of deterministic exten- sions for dynamic argumentation frameworks. In JELIA, pages 288-304, 2016.","title":"Incremental computation of deterministic extensions for dynamic argumentation frameworks","authors":"Parisi Greco, Sergio Greco, Francesco Parisi","year":"2016","venue":"JELIA","doi":null,"url":null,"internal_url":null},{"position":28,"raw":"[Kökciyan et al., 2017] Nadin Kökciyan, Nefise Yaglikci, and Pinar Yolum. An argumentation approach for resolv- ing privacy disputes in online social networks. ACM Trans. Internet Techn., 17(3):1-22, 2017.","title":"An argumentation approach for resolving privacy disputes in online social networks","authors":"Nadin Kökciyan, Nefise Yaglikci, Pinar Yolum","year":"2017","venue":"ACM Trans. Internet Techn","doi":null,"url":null,"internal_url":null},{"position":29,"raw":"[Kröll et al., 2017] Markus Kröll, Reinhard Pichler, and Ste- fan Woltran. On the complexity of enumerating the ex- tensions of abstract argumentation frameworks. In IJCAI, pages 1145-1152, 2017.","title":"On the complexity of enumerating the extensions of abstract argumentation frameworks","authors":"Markus Kröll, Reinhard Pichler, Stefan Woltran","year":"2017","venue":"IJCAI","doi":null,"url":null,"internal_url":"/proceedings/2017/159"},{"position":30,"raw":"[Liao and Huang, 2013] Beishui Liao and Huaxin Huang. Partial semantics of argumentation: basic properties and empirical results. J. Log. Comput., 23(3):541-562, 2013.","title":"Partial semantics of argumentation: basic properties and empirical results","authors":"Huang Liao, Beishui Liao, Huaxin Huang","year":"2013","venue":"J. Log. Comput","doi":null,"url":null,"internal_url":null},{"position":31,"raw":"[Liao et al., 2011] Bei Shui Liao, Li Jin, and Robert C. Koons. Dynamics of argumentation systems: A division- based method. Artif. Intell., 175(11):1790-1814, 2011.","title":"Dynamics of argumentation systems: A divisionbased method","authors":"Shui Bei, Li Liao, Robert C Jin, Koons","year":"2011","venue":"Artif. Intell","doi":null,"url":null,"internal_url":null},{"position":32,"raw":"[Liao, 2013] Beishui Liao. Toward incremental computation of argumentation semantics: A decomposition-based ap- proach. Ann. Math. Artif. Intell., 67(3-4):319-358, 2013.","title":"Toward incremental computation of argumentation semantics: A decomposition-based approach","authors":"Beishui Liao, Liao","year":"2013","venue":"Ann. Math. Artif. Intell","doi":null,"url":null,"internal_url":null},{"position":33,"raw":"[Oikarinen and Woltran, 2011] Emilia Oikarinen and Stefan Woltran. Characterizing strong equivalence for argumen- tation frameworks. Artif. Intell., 175(14-15):1985-2009, 2011.","title":"Characterizing strong equivalence for argumentation frameworks","authors":"Woltran Oikarinen, Emilia Oikarinen, Stefan Woltran","year":"2011","venue":"Artif. Intell","doi":null,"url":null,"internal_url":null},{"position":34,"raw":"[Rahwan and Simari, 2009] Iyad Rahwan and Guillermo R. Simari. Argumentation in AI. Springer Publishing Com- pany, Incorporated, 1st edition, 2009.","title":"Iyad Rahwan and Guillermo R","authors":"Simari ; Rahwan, Simari","year":"2009","venue":null,"doi":null,"url":null,"internal_url":null},{"position":35,"raw":"[Thimm and Villata, 2017] Matthias Thimm and Serena Vil- lata. The first international competition on computational models of argumentation: Results and analysis. Artif. In- tell., 252:267-294, 2017.","title":"Matthias Thimm and Serena Villata. The first international competition on computational models of argumentation: Results and analysis","authors":"Villata Thimm","year":"2017","venue":"Artif. Intell","doi":null,"url":null,"internal_url":null}],"license_note":"Copyright International Joint Conferences on Artificial Intelligence."}