An action language-based formalisation of an abstract argumentation framework
This work addresses a specific issue in formal argumentation for researchers, but it is incremental as it builds on existing frameworks with modifications.
The paper tackles the problem of modeling argumentative dialogues by incorporating the order of enunciation into abstract argumentation frameworks, resulting in a method that deduces a unique outcome called an extension and establishes properties like termination and correctness.
An abstract argumentation framework is a commonly used formalism to provide a static representation of a dialogue. However, the order of enunciation of the arguments in an argumentative dialogue is very important and can affect the outcome of this dialogue. In this paper, we propose a new framework for modelling abstract argumentation graphs, a model that incorporates the order of enunciation of arguments. By taking this order into account, we have the means to deduce a unique outcome for each dialogue, called an extension. We also establish several properties, such as termination and correctness, and discuss two notions of completeness. In particular, we propose a modification of the previous transformation based on a "last enunciated last updated" strategy, which verifies the second form of completeness.