Epistemic Argumentation Framework: Theory and Computation
Authors: Chiaki Sakama, Tran Cao Son
JAIR 2020 | Venue PDF | Archive PDF | Plain Text | LLM Run Details
| Reproducibility Variable | Result | LLM Response |
|---|---|---|
| Research Type | Theoretical | The paper introduces the notion of an epistemic argumentation framework (EAF) as a means to integrate the beliefs of a reasoner with argumentation. Intuitively, an EAF encodes the beliefs of an agent who reasons about arguments. Formally, an EAF is a pair of an argumentation framework and an epistemic constraint. The semantics of the EAF is defined by the notion of an ω-epistemic labelling set, where ω is complete, stable, grounded, or preferred, which is a set of ω-labellings that collectively satisfies the epistemic constraint of the EAF. The paper shows how EAF can represent different views of reasoners on the same argumentation framework. It also includes representing preferences in EAF and multi-agent argumentation. Finally, the paper discusses complexity issues and computation using epistemic logic programming. |
| Researcher Affiliation | Academia | Chiaki Sakama EMAIL Wakayama University 930 Sakaedani, Wakayama 640-8510 Japan. Tran Cao Son EMAIL New Mexico State University Las Cruces, NM 88003, USA. |
| Pseudocode | Yes | Algorithm 1: Existence(EAF, ω) Input: ω, EAF = (AF, ϕ). Output: true if EAF has a (non-empty) ω-epistemic labelling set; false otherwise. 1 Convert to DNF: ϕ = k j=1EC(ψj; ψj 1, . . . , ψj nj) 2 where EC(ψ; ψ1, . . . , ψk) = Kψ Vk i=1 Mψi 3 for j = 1 to k do 4 num labelling := 0 5 for i = 1 to nj do 6 if D(ω, AF, ψj ψj i ) = true then 7 num labelling := num labelling + 1 8 if num labelling = nj then return true 9 return false |
| Open Source Code | No | The system presented in this section could be realized by an epistemic logic program solver such as the one presented by Son, Le, Kahl, and Leclerc (2017). This statement indicates that existing third-party solvers could be used to implement the system, but it does not constitute an explicit release of the authors' own source code for the methodology described in this paper. |
| Open Datasets | No | The paper primarily introduces a theoretical framework and computational methods, using illustrative examples (e.g., Example 1, 2) rather than empirical evaluation on specific datasets. Therefore, it does not mention the use or availability of any open datasets. |
| Dataset Splits | No | The paper focuses on theoretical and computational aspects of Epistemic Argumentation Frameworks and does not report on empirical experiments using datasets. Consequently, there is no mention of dataset splits like training, test, or validation sets. |
| Hardware Specification | No | The paper is theoretical and focuses on algorithm design and complexity analysis. It does not describe any empirical experiments that would require specific hardware specifications. |
| Software Dependencies | No | The paper mentions 'answer set solvers such as clingo or dlv' and refers to 'an epistemic logic program solver such as the one presented by Son, Le, Kahl, and Leclerc (2017)' as tools that could be used. However, it does not provide specific version numbers for these or any other software dependencies required to replicate the computational aspects described. |
| Experiment Setup | No | The paper is theoretical, presenting a new framework and discussing its computational aspects and complexity. It does not include any empirical experiments, and thus no experimental setup details, hyperparameters, or training configurations are provided. |