Access the full text.
Sign up today, get DeepDyve free for 14 days.
Loading next page...
/lp/association-for-computing-machinery/complexity-classifications-for-logic-based-argumentation-Hs7VZ0UBFZ
References (33)
-
S. Parsons, M. Wooldridge, Leila Amgoud (2003)
Properties and Complexity of Some Formal Inter-agent DialoguesJ. Log. Comput., 13
-
H. Vaughan (1941)
Review: Emil L. Post, The Two-valued Iterative Systems of Mathematical LogicJournal of Symbolic Logic, 6
-
H. Vollmer (2008)
Boolean Constraint Satisfaction Problems: When Does Post's Lattice Help? -
(2010)
Article 39, Publication date Complexity Classifications for logic-based Argumentation -
V. Bodnarchuk, L. Kaluzhnin, V. Kotov, B. Romov (1969)
Galois theory for post algebras. ICybernetics, 5
-
V. Bodnarchuk, L. Kaluzhnin, V. Kotov, B. Romov (1969)
Galois theory for Post algebras. IICybernetics, 5
-
P. Besnard, A. Hunter (2001)
A logic-based theory of deductive argumentsArtif. Intell., 128
-
Gustav Nordh, B. Zanuttini (2008)
What makes propositional abduction tractableArtif. Intell., 172
-
C. Chesñevar, Ana Maguitman, R. Loui (2000)
Logical models of argumentACM Comput. Surv., 32
-
in P if Γ is Schaefer and ε-valid -
Emil Post (1942)
The two-valued iterative systems of mathematical logicAnnals of Mathematics Studies
-
E. Allender, Michael Bauland, N. Immerman, Henning Schnoor, H. Vollmer (2005)
The complexity of satisfiability problems: Refining Schaefer's theoremElectron. Colloquium Comput. Complex., TR04
-
P. Dung (1995)
On the Acceptability of Arguments and its Fundamental Role in Nonmonotonic Reasoning, Logic Programming and n-Person GamesArtif. Intell., 77
-
P. Besnard, A. Hunter (2007)
Elements of Argumentation -
N. Creignou, Johannes Schmidt, Michael Thomas, S. Woltran (2011)
Complexity of logic-based argumentation in Post's frameworkArgument Comput., 2
-
N. Creignou, Johannes Schmidt, Michael Thomas (2010)
Complexity Classifications for Propositional Abduction in Post's FrameworkArXiv, abs/1006.4923
-
N. Creignou, B. Zanuttini (2006)
A Complete Classification of the Complexity of Propositional AbductionSIAM J. Comput., 36
-
D. Geiger (1968)
CLOSED SYSTEMS OF FUNCTIONS AND PREDICATESPacific Journal of Mathematics, 27
-
N. Creignou, Phokion Kolaitis, B. Zanuttini (2008)
Structure identification of Boolean relations and plain bases for co-clonesJ. Comput. Syst. Sci., 74
-
Elmar Böhler, S. Reith, Henning Schnoor, H. Vollmer (2005)
Bases for Boolean co-clonesInf. Process. Lett., 96
-
To prove coNP-hardness we give a reduction from the coNP-complete problem Imp(Γ) We map (ϕ, ψ) an instance of the first problem to ({ϕ}, ψ) -
C. Papadimitriou, David Wolfe (1985)
The complexity of facets resolved26th Annual Symposium on Foundations of Computer Science (sfcs 1985)
-
N. Creignou, S. Khanna, M. Sudan (2001)
Complexity classifications of Boolean constraint satisfaction problems, 7
-
L. Fortnow, Steven Homer (2018)
Computational Complexity -
(2010)
Received XXX; revised XXX; accepted XXX ACM Transactions on Computational Logic -
P. Jeavons (1998)
On the Algebraic Structure of Combinatorial ProblemsTheor. Comput. Sci., 200
-
T. Schaefer (1978)
The complexity of satisfiability problemsProceedings of the tenth annual ACM symposium on Theory of computing
-
S. Cook (1971)
The complexity of theorem-proving proceduresProceedings of the third annual ACM symposium on Theory of computing
-
(2013)
Article 19, Publication date -
Thomas Eiter, G. Gottlob (1993)
The complexity of logic-based abduction -
R. Hirsch, Nikos Gorogiannis (2010)
The Complexity of the Warranted Formula Problem in Propositional ArgumentationJ. Log. Comput., 20
-
Henning Schnoor, Ilka Schnoor (2008)
Partial Polymorphisms and Constraint Satisfaction Problems -
H. Prakken, G. Vreeswijk (2001)
Logics for Defeasible Argumentation
- Publisher
- Association for Computing Machinery
- Copyright
- Copyright © 2014 by ACM Inc.
- ISSN
- 1529-3785
- DOI
- 10.1145/2629421
- Publisher site
- See Article on Publisher Site
Abstract
Complexity Classifications for Logic-Based Argumentation NADIA CREIGNOU, Aix-Marseille Universit´ , CNRS e ¨ UWE EGLY, Technische Universitat Wien JOHANNES SCHMIDT*, Link¨ ping University o We consider logic-based argumentation in which an argument is a pair ( , ), where the support is a minimal consistent set of formulae taken from a given knowledge base (usually denoted by ) that entails the claim (a formula). We study the complexity of three central problems in argumentation: the existence of a support , the verification of a support, and the relevance problem (given , is there a support such that ?). When arguments are given in the full language of propositional logic, these problems p are computationally costly tasks: the verification problem is DP-complete; the others are 2 -complete. We study these problems in Schaefer's famous framework where the considered propositional formulae are in generalized conjunctive normal form. This means that formulae are conjunctions of constraints built upon a fixed finite set of Boolean relations (the constraint language). We show that according to the properties of this language , deciding whether there exists a support for a claim in a given knowledge base is either p polynomial, NP-complete, coNP-complete, or 2
Journal
ACM Transactions on Computational Logic (TOCL) – Association for Computing Machinery
Published: Aug 1, 2014