Attack semantics and collective attacks revisited

Caminada, Martin ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0002-7498-0238, König, Matthias, Rapberger, Anna and Ulbricht, Markus 2024. Attack semantics and collective attacks revisited. Argument and Computation 10.3233/AAC-230011

PDF - Accepted Post-Print Version Download (769kB)

Abstract

In the current paper we re-examine the concepts of attack semantics and collective attacks in abstract argumentation, and examine how these concepts interact with each other. For this, we systematically map the space of possibilities. Starting with standard argumentation frameworks (which consist of a directed graph with nodes and arrows) we briefly state both node semantics and arrow semantics (the latter a.k.a. attack semantics) in both their extensions-based form and labellings-based form. We then proceed with SETAFs (which consist of a directed hypergraph of nodes and arrows, to take into account the notion of collective attacks) and state both node semantics and arrow semantics, in both their extensions-based and labellings-based form. We then show equivalence between the extensions-based and labellings-based form, for node semantics and arrow semantics of AFs, as well as for node semantics and arrow semantics of SETAFs. Moreover, we show equivalence between node semantics and arrow semantics for AFs, and equivalence between node semantics and arrow semantics for SETAFs (with the notable exception of semi-stable). We also provide a novel way of converting a SETAF to an AF such that semantics are preserved, without the use of any “meta arguments”. Although the main part of our work is on the level of abstract argumentation, we do provide an application of our theory on the instantiated level. More specifically, we show that the classical characterisation of Assumption-Based Argumentation (ABA) can be seen as an instantiation based on a SETAF, whereas the contemporary characterisation of ABA can be seen as an instantiation based on a standard AF. Our theory of how to convert a SETAF to an AF can then be used to account for both the similarities and the differences between the classical and contemporary characterisations of ABA. Most prominently, our theory is able to explain the semantic mismatch for semi-stable semantics that arises in the ABA instantiation process.

Item Type:	Article
Date Type:	Published Online
Status:	In Press
Schools:	Computer Science & Informatics
Publisher:	IOS Press
ISSN:	1946-2174
Date of First Compliant Deposit:	21 March 2024
Date of Acceptance:	26 February 2024
Last Modified:	10 Nov 2024 08:15
URI:	https://orca.cardiff.ac.uk/id/eprint/167417

Actions (repository staff only)

Edit Item