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...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Miao, Chunyan, Leung, Cyril, Shen, Zhiqi, Chin, Jing Jih, Zeng, Zhiwei
Other Authors: School of Computer Science and Engineering
Format: Conference or Workshop Item
Language:English
Published: 2019
Subjects:
Online Access:https://hdl.handle.net/10356/103315
http://hdl.handle.net/10220/49774
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
Institution: Nanyang Technological University
Language: English
id sg-ntu-dr.10356-103315
record_format dspace
spelling sg-ntu-dr.10356-1033152020-11-01T04:43:51Z Computing argumentative explanations in bipolar argumentation frameworks Miao, Chunyan Leung, Cyril Shen, Zhiqi Chin, Jing Jih Zeng, Zhiwei School of Computer Science and Engineering Interdisciplinary Graduate School (IGS) Lee Kong Chian School of Medicine (LKCMedicine) The Thirty-Third AAAI Conference on Artificial Intelligence (AAAI-19) Joint NTU-UBC Research Centre of Excellence in Active Living for the Elderly (LILY) Argumentation Explainable Artificial Intelligence Social sciences::Sociology 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. NRF (Natl Research Foundation, S’pore) MOH (Min. of Health, S’pore) Accepted version 2019-08-26T02:25:12Z 2019-12-06T21:09:46Z 2019-08-26T02:25:12Z 2019-12-06T21:09:46Z 2019 Conference Paper Zeng, Z., Miao, C., Leung, C., Shen, Z., & Chin, J. J. (2019). Computing argumentative explanations in bipolar argumentation frameworks. The Thirty-Third AAAI Conference on Artificial Intelligence (AAAI-19), 3310079-10080. doi:10.1609/aaai.v33i01.330110079 https://hdl.handle.net/10356/103315 http://hdl.handle.net/10220/49774 10.1609/aaai.v33i01.330110079 en © 2019 Association for the Advancement of Artificial Intelligence (AAAI). All rights reserved. This paper was published in The Thirty-Third AAAI Conference on Artificial Intelligence (AAAI-19) and is made available with permission of Association for the Advancement of Artificial Intelligence (AAAI). 2 p. application/pdf
institution Nanyang Technological University
building NTU Library
continent Asia
country Singapore
Singapore
content_provider NTU Library
collection DR-NTU
language English
topic Argumentation
Explainable Artificial Intelligence
Social sciences::Sociology
spellingShingle Argumentation
Explainable Artificial Intelligence
Social sciences::Sociology
Miao, Chunyan
Leung, Cyril
Shen, Zhiqi
Chin, Jing Jih
Zeng, Zhiwei
Computing argumentative explanations in bipolar argumentation frameworks
description 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.
author2 School of Computer Science and Engineering
author_facet School of Computer Science and Engineering
Miao, Chunyan
Leung, Cyril
Shen, Zhiqi
Chin, Jing Jih
Zeng, Zhiwei
format Conference or Workshop Item
author Miao, Chunyan
Leung, Cyril
Shen, Zhiqi
Chin, Jing Jih
Zeng, Zhiwei
author_sort Miao, Chunyan
title Computing argumentative explanations in bipolar argumentation frameworks
title_short Computing argumentative explanations in bipolar argumentation frameworks
title_full Computing argumentative explanations in bipolar argumentation frameworks
title_fullStr Computing argumentative explanations in bipolar argumentation frameworks
title_full_unstemmed Computing argumentative explanations in bipolar argumentation frameworks
title_sort computing argumentative explanations in bipolar argumentation frameworks
publishDate 2019
url https://hdl.handle.net/10356/103315
http://hdl.handle.net/10220/49774
_version_ 1683494182117703680