27,104 research outputs found
Improved Answer-Set Programming Encodings for Abstract Argumentation
The design of efficient solutions for abstract argumentation problems is a
crucial step towards advanced argumentation systems. One of the most prominent
approaches in the literature is to use Answer-Set Programming (ASP) for this
endeavor. In this paper, we present new encodings for three prominent
argumentation semantics using the concept of conditional literals in
disjunctions as provided by the ASP-system clingo. Our new encodings are not
only more succinct than previous versions, but also outperform them on standard
benchmarks.Comment: To appear in Theory and Practice of Logic Programming (TPLP),
Proceedings of ICLP 201
Responsible Autonomy
As intelligent systems are increasingly making decisions that directly affect
society, perhaps the most important upcoming research direction in AI is to
rethink the ethical implications of their actions. Means are needed to
integrate moral, societal and legal values with technological developments in
AI, both during the design process as well as part of the deliberation
algorithms employed by these systems. In this paper, we describe leading ethics
theories and propose alternative ways to ensure ethical behavior by artificial
systems. Given that ethics are dependent on the socio-cultural context and are
often only implicit in deliberation processes, methodologies are needed to
elicit the values held by designers and stakeholders, and to make these
explicit leading to better understanding and trust on artificial autonomous
systems.Comment: IJCAI2017 (International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence
Compact Argumentation Frameworks
Abstract argumentation frameworks (AFs) are one of the most studied
formalisms in AI. In this work, we introduce a certain subclass of AFs which we
call compact. Given an extension-based semantics, the corresponding compact AFs
are characterized by the feature that each argument of the AF occurs in at
least one extension. This not only guarantees a certain notion of fairness;
compact AFs are thus also minimal in the sense that no argument can be removed
without changing the outcome. We address the following questions in the paper:
(1) How are the classes of compact AFs related for different semantics? (2)
Under which circumstances can AFs be transformed into equivalent compact ones?
(3) Finally, we show that compact AFs are indeed a non-trivial subclass, since
the verification problem remains coNP-hard for certain semantics.Comment: Contribution to the 15th International Workshop on Non-Monotonic
Reasoning, 2014, Vienn
Recommended from our members
Argumentation-based design rationale - the sharpest tools in the box
In this paper the three main argumentation-based design rationale methodologies - IBIS, QOC and DRL – will be discussed with illustrations of particular points drawn from a working example. The areas of scope, expressiveness in terms of design space and argumentation representation and the resulting usability by human and computer will be examined. Particular attention is paid to how the development of the artifact is being controlled by the evaluation of intentions and objectives that allow consistent goals throughout the design to be formulated, evaluated and modified. Furthermore, decision making within an argumentative context is highlighted
- …