id: 05897811
dt: a
an: 05897811
au: Dung, Phan Minh; Thang, Phan Minh
ti: Closure and consistency rationalities in logic-based argumentation.
so: Balduccini, Marcello (ed.) et al., Logic programming, knowledge
    representation, and nonmonotonic reasoning. Essays dedicated to Michael
    Gelfond on the occasion of his 65th birthday. Berlin: Springer (ISBN
    978-3-642-20831-7/pbk). Lecture Notes in Computer Science 6565. Lecture
    Notes in Artificial Intelligence, 33-43 (2011).
py: 2011
pu: Berlin: Springer
la: EN
cc: 
ut: 
ci: 
li: doi:10.1007/978-3-642-20832-4_3
ab: Summary: Caminada and Amgoud have argued that logic-based argumentation
    systems should satisfy the intuitive and natural principles of logical
    closure and consistency. Prakken has developed this idea further for a
    richer logic. A question arises naturally whether a general structure
    guaranteeing the logical closure and consistency properties could be
    identified that is common for all underlying logics. We explore this
    question by first defining a logic-based argumentation framework as
    combination of an abstract argumentation framework with a monotonic
    Tarski-like consequence operator. We then demonstrate that the logical
    closure and consistency properties are rested on a simple notion of a
    base of arguments from which the argument could be constructed in an
    indefeasible way (using the monotonic consequence operator) and the
    only way to attack an argument is to attack its base. We show that two
    natural properties of structural closure and consistency covering based
    on the idea of bases of arguments indeed guarantee the logical closure
    and consistency properties. We demonstrate how the properties of
    structural closure and consistency covering are captured naturally in
    argumentation systems of Caminada, Amgoud and Prakken as well as in
    assumption-based argumentation.
rv: