Abstract
The fundamental mechanism that humans use in argumentation can be formalized in abstract argumentation frameworks. Many semantics are associated with abstract argumentation frameworks, each one consisting of a set of extensions, that is, a set of sets of arguments. Some of these semantics are based on preference relations that essentially impose to maximize or minimize some property. This paper presents the argumentation reasoner PYGLAF, which provides a uniform view of many semantics for abstract argumentation frameworks in terms of circumscription. Specifically, several computational problems of abstract argumentation frameworks are reduced to circumscription by means of linear encodings, and a few others are solved by means of a sequence of calls to an oracle for circumscription. Finally, grounded extensions are obtained in polynomial time by unit propagation, and acceptance problems are addressed by first checking cardinality optimal models of circumscribed theories, so that the naive extension enumeration is possibly avoided.
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
