Evidential-Based Higher-Order Set Argumentation Framework
Evidential argumentation extends Dung's abstract argumentation by requiring arguments and interactions to be backed by chains of evidence rooted in prima-facie elements. However, existing formalisms lack a unified treatment of evidential support, higher-order relations (attacks and supports targeting arbitrary elements), and collective interactions (sources as sets). In this paper, we introduce the Evidential-Based Higher-Order Set Argumentation Framework (EHSAF), which conservatively generalises several existing frameworks within a single expressive setting. We develop two complete semantics for EHSAFs: an \emph{adjacent complete labelling semantics} that admits multiple truth values (true, false, undecided) for arguments in support cycles, reflecting an open epistemic attitude toward future evidence; and an \emph{extension-based complete semantics} that follows a strict evidentialist stance, accepting only arguments with well-founded support chains. We show that these two semantics diverge in the presence of support cycles, and prove their equivalence under support-acyclicity. To enable computational reasoning, we provide a normal propositional encoding of EHSAFs and prove that, in three-valued Łukasiewicz logic, its models correspond precisely to the adjacent complete labellings. We further extend this encoding to continuous fuzzy logics (G{ö}del, Product, and Łukasiewicz), defining a continuous fuzzy normal encoded semantics. We establish that this fuzzy semantics satisfies key properties---continuity, monotonicity, boundary conditions, and solution existence---and that its ternarisation recovers the adjacent complete labellings under natural t-norm conditions. Our framework thus unifies expressive argumentation with principled three-valued and fuzzy semantics, bridging the gap between qualitative and quantitative reasoning about evidence.
Code (0)
등록된 구현이 없습니다.
Similar Papers 제목 키워드 기반
A Formalisation of Abstract Argumentation in Higher-Order Logic
We present an approach for representing abstract argumentation frameworks based on an encoding into classical higher-order logic. This provides a uniform framework for computer-assisted assessment of abstract argumentati…
Abstract ArgumentationForms and Norms of Indecision in Argumentation Theory
One main goal of argumentation theory is to evaluate arguments and to determine whether they should be accepted or rejected. When there is no clear answer, a third option, being undecided, has to be taken into account. I…
PhilosophyEvidential Physics-Informed Neural Networks
We present a novel class of Physics-Informed Neural Networks that is formulated based on the principles of Evidential Deep Learning, where the model incorporates uncertainty quantification by learning parameters of a hig…
Uncertainty QuantificationEvidential community detection based on density peaks
Credal partitions in the framework of belief functions can give us a better understanding of the analyzed data set. In order to find credal community structure in graph data sets, in this paper, we propose a novel eviden…
Community DetectionArgumentation Schemes for Blockchain Deanonymization
Cryptocurrency forensics became standard tools for law enforcement. Their basic idea is to deanonymise cryptocurrency transactions to identify the people behind them. Cryptocurrency deanonymisation techniques are often b…
Legal Reasoning