1
|
Nouioua F, Boutouhami S. Argumentation frameworks with necessities and their relationship with logic programs. ARGUMENT & COMPUTATION 2022. [DOI: 10.3233/aac-210028] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/15/2022]
Abstract
This paper presents a comprehensive study of argumentation frameworks with necessities (AFNs), a bipolar extension of Dung Abstract argumentation frameworks (AFs) where the support relation captures a positive interaction between arguments having the meaning of necessity: the acceptance of an argument may require the acceptance of other argument(s). The paper discusses new main acceptability semantics for AFNs and their characterization both by a direct approach and a labelling approach. It examines the relationship between AFNs and Dung AFs and shows the gain provided by the former in terms of concision. Finally, the paper shows how to represent an AFN as a normal logic program (LP) and vice versa and in both cases establishes a one-to-one correspondence between extensions under the main acceptability semantics (except for semi-stable semantics where the correspondence is not completely full) of an AFN and particular cases of 3-valued stable models of normal LPs.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Farid Nouioua
- Computer Science Department, University of Bordj Bou Arreridj, Algeria
- LIS UMR-CNRS 7020, University of Aix-Marseille, France
| | - Sara Boutouhami
- Computer Science Department, University of Bordj Bou Arreridj, Algeria
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
Sassoon I, Kökciyan N, Modgil S, Parsons S. Argumentation schemes for clinical decision support. ARGUMENT & COMPUTATION 2021. [DOI: 10.3233/aac-200550] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/15/2022]
Abstract
This paper demonstrates how argumentation schemes can be used in decision support systems that help clinicians in making treatment decisions. The work builds on the use of computational argumentation, a rigorous approach to reasoning with complex data that places strong emphasis on being able to justify and explain the decisions that are recommended. The main contribution of the paper is to present a novel set of specialised argumentation schemes that can be used in the context of a clinical decision support system to assist in reasoning about what treatments to offer. These schemes provide a mechanism for capturing clinical reasoning in such a way that it can be handled by the formal reasoning mechanisms of formal argumentation. The paper describes how the integration between argumentation schemes and formal argumentation may be carried out, sketches how this is achieved by an implementation that we have created and illustrates the overall process on a small set of case studies.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Isabel Sassoon
- Department of Computer Science, Brunel University London, UK. E-mail:
| | - Nadin Kökciyan
- School of Informatics, University of Edinburgh, UK. E-mail:
| | - Sanjay Modgil
- Department of Informatics, King’s College London, UK. E-mail:
| | - Simon Parsons
- Department of Computer Science, University of Lincoln, UK. E-mail:
| |
Collapse
|