Computing argumentative explanations in bipolar argumentation frameworks

The process of arguing is also the process of justifying and explaining. Transparent reasoning process endows argumentation good explainability. Recently, more research efforts have been devoted to realizing the explanatory power of argumentation in unipolar argumentation frameworks. In addition to...

全面介紹

Saved in:
書目詳細資料
Main Authors: Miao, Chunyan, Leung, Cyril, Shen, Zhiqi, Chin, Jing Jih, Zeng, Zhiwei
其他作者: School of Computer Science and Engineering
格式: Conference or Workshop Item
語言:English
出版: 2019
主題:
在線閱讀:https://hdl.handle.net/10356/103315
http://hdl.handle.net/10220/49774
標簽: 添加標簽
沒有標簽, 成為第一個標記此記錄!
實物特徵
總結:The process of arguing is also the process of justifying and explaining. Transparent reasoning process endows argumentation good explainability. Recently, more research efforts have been devoted to realizing the explanatory power of argumentation in unipolar argumentation frameworks. In addition to the attack relation, bipolar frameworks consider the support relation, which brings greater expressibility but also complexity. It is worth exploring how the interactions encompassed in the support relation contribute to the arguing process and how to capture them in explanations. In this paper, we propose a “stronger” notion of defence and a new bipolar admissibility semantics, which are defined based on both the attack and the support relations, and use them to formalize two types of explanations, namely concise and strong explanations. We then present complete and sound processes for computing explanations by constructing bipolar dispute trees.