Paper Info
Title
On the Equivalence between Assumption-Based Argumentation and Logic Programming.
Abstract
Assumption-Based Argumentation (ABA) has been shown to subsume various other non-monotonic reasoning formalisms, among them normal logic programming (LP). We re-examine the relationship between ABA and LP and show that normal LP also subsumes (flat) ABA. More precisely, we specify a procedure that given a (flat) ABA framework yields an associated logic program with almost the same syntax whose semantics coincide with those of the ABA framework. That is, the 3-valued stable (respectively well-founded, regular, 2-valued stable, and ideal) models of the associated logic program coincide with the complete (respectively grounded, preferred, stable, and ideal) assumption labellings and extensions of the ABA framework. Moreover, we show how our results on the translation from ABA to LP can be reapplied for a reverse translation from LP to ABA, and observe that some of the existing results in the literature are in fact special cases of our work. Overall, we show that (flat) ABA frameworks can be seen as normal logic programs with a slightly different syntax. This implies that methods developed for one of these formalisms can be equivalently applied to the other by simply modifying the syntax.
Year
DOI
Venue
2017
10.1613/jair.5581
JOURNAL OF ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE RESEARCH
Field
DocType
Volume
Discrete mathematics,Logic program,Mathematical optimization,Algebra,Argumentation theory,Equivalence (measure theory),Logic programming,Rotation formalisms in three dimensions,Syntax,Semantics,Mathematics,AND gate
Journal
60
Issue
ISSN
Citations 
1
1076-9757
2
PageRank 
References 
Authors
0.36
9
2
Name
Order
Citations
PageRank
Martin W. A. Caminada186546.84
Claudia Schulz 00012279.35