Revisiting Approximate Reasoning based on Grounded Semantics

Jérôme Delobelle (1, 2) , Jean-Guy Mailly (1, 2) , Julien Rossit (1, 2)

1 UPCité - Université Paris Cité
2 LIPADE (URP_2517) - Laboratoire d'Informatique Paris Descartes

Efficient computation of hard reasoning tasks is a key issue in abstract argumentation. One recent approach consists in defining ap- proximate algorithms, i.e. methods that provide an answer that may not always be correct, but outperforms the exact algorithms regarding the computation runtime. One such approach proposes to use the grounded semantics, which is polynomially computable, as a starting point for de- termining whether arguments are (credulously or skeptically) accepted with respect to various semantics. In this paper, we push further this idea by defining various approaches to evaluate the acceptability of ar- guments which are not in the grounded extension, neither attacked by it. We have implemented our approaches, and we describe the result of their empirical evaluation.

Keywords: abstract argumentation; approximate reasoning

Domains: Computer Science [cs]; Artificial Intelligence [cs.AI]

Jérôme Delobelle, Jean-Guy Mailly, Julien Rossit. Revisiting Approximate Reasoning based on Grounded Semantics. Seventeenth European Conference on Symbolic and Quantitative Approaches to Reasoning with Uncertainty (ECSQARU 2023), Sep 2023, Arras, France. ⟨hal-04258651⟩