5 research outputs found
Stable Normative Explanations: From Argumentation to Deontic Logic
This paper examines how a notion of stable explanation developed elsewhere in
Defeasible Logic can be expressed in the context of formal argumentation. With
this done, we discuss the deontic meaning of this reconstruction and show how
to build from argumentation neighborhood structures for deontic logic where
this notion of explanation can be characterised. Some direct complexity results
are offered.Comment: 15 pages, extended version of the short paper accepted at JELIA 202
Computational Complexity of Strong Admissibility for Abstract Dialectical Frameworks
Abstract dialectical frameworks (ADFs) have been introduced as a formalism for modeling and evaluating argumentation allowing general logical satisfaction conditions. Different criteria used to settle the acceptance of arguments arecalled semantics. Semantics of ADFs have so far mainly been defined based on the concept of admissibility. Recently, the notion of strong admissibility has been introduced for ADFs. In the current work we study the computational complexityof the following reasoning tasks under strong admissibility semantics. We address 1. the credulous/skeptical decision problem; 2. the verification problem; 3. the strong justification problem; and 4. the problem of finding a smallest witness of strong justification of a queried argument