Characterizing acceptability semantics of argumentation frameworks with recursive attack and support relations

GOTTIFREDI, SEBASTIAN; SIMARI, GUILLERMO R.; COHEN, ANDREA; GARCÍA, ALEJANDRO J.

ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE

ELSEVIER SCIENCE BV

Año: 2018 vol. 262 p. 336 - 368

0004-3702

Over the last decade, several extensions of Dung´s Abstract Argumentation Frameworks (AFs) have been introduced in the literature. Some of these extensions concern the nature of the attack relation, such as the consideration of recursive attacks, whereas others incorporate additional interactions, such as a support relation. Recently, the Attack?Support Argumentation Framework (ASAF) was proposed, which accounts for recursive attacks and supports, attacks to supports and supports to attacks, at any level, where the support relation is interpreted as necessity. Currently, to determine the accepted elements of an ASAF (which may be arguments, attacks, and supports) it is required to translate such an ASAF into a Dung´s AF. In this work, we provide a formal characterization of acceptability semantics directly on the ASAF, without requiring such a translation. We prove that our characterization is sound since it satisfies different results from Dung´s argumentation theory; moreover, we formally show that the approach proposed here for addressing acceptability is equivalent to the preexisting one, in which the ASAF was translated into an AF. Also, we formalize the relationship between the ASAF and other frameworks on which it is inspired: the Argumentation Framework with Recursive Attacks (AFRA) and the Argumentation Framework with Necessities (AFN).