In this paper we define a recursive semantics for warrant in a general defeasible argumentation framework by formalizing a notion of collective (non-binary) con- flict among arguments. This allows us to ensure direct and indirect consistency (in the sense of Caminada and Amgoud) without distinguishing between direct and in- direct conflicts. Then, the general defeasible argumentation framework is extended by allowing to attach levels of preference to defeasible knowledge items and by providing a level-wise definition of warranted and blocked conclusions. Finally, we formalize the warrant recursive semantics for the particular framework of Pos- sibilistic Defeasible Logic Programming, characterize the unique output program property and design an efficient algorithm for computing warranted conclusions in polynomial space.
Links:
[1] http://www.iiia.csic.es/en/individual/teresa-alsinet
[2] http://www.iiia.csic.es/en/individual/ramon-bejar
[3] http://www.iiia.csic.es/en/individual/lluis-godo
[4] http://www.iiia.csic.es/en/publications/export/tagged/3837
[5] http://www.iiia.csic.es/en/publications/export/xml/3837
[6] http://www.iiia.csic.es/en/publications/export/bib/3837
[7] http://www.iiia.csic.es/en/project/arinf
[8] http://www.iiia.csic.es/en/project/at
[9] http://www.iiia.csic.es/en/project/locomotion-0
[10] http://www.iiia.csic.es/en/project/mulog-2