Understanding ProbLog as Probabilistic Argumentation
This work provides theoretical connections for researchers in probabilistic logic and argumentation, but it is incremental as it builds on existing formalisms without introducing new methods or broad applications.
The paper tackles the problem of connecting ProbLog, a probabilistic logic programming language, to probabilistic argumentation, showing that ProbLog is an instance of Probabilistic Abstract Argumentation based on Assumption-Based Argumentation. This result enables the transfer of alternative semantics between these formalisms and supports novel argumentative explanations for ProbLog outputs.
ProbLog is a popular probabilistic logic programming language/tool, widely used for applications requiring to deal with inherent uncertainties in structured domains. In this paper we study connections between ProbLog and a variant of another well-known formalism combining symbolic reasoning and reasoning under uncertainty, i.e. probabilistic argumentation. Specifically, we show that ProbLog is an instance of a form of Probabilistic Abstract Argumentation (PAA) that builds upon Assumption-Based Argumentation (ABA). The connections pave the way towards equipping ProbLog with alternative semantics, inherited from PAA/PABA, as well as obtaining novel argumentation semantics for PAA/PABA, leveraging on prior connections between ProbLog and argumentation. Further, the connections pave the way towards novel forms of argumentative explanations for ProbLog's outputs.