Labellings and games for extended argumentation frameworks
Sanjay Modgil · 2009
Dung’s abstract theory of argumentation has be-come established as a general framework for var-ious species of non-monotonic reasoning, and rea-soning in the presence of conflict. A Dung frame-work consists of arguments related by attacks, and the extensions of a framework, and so the status of arguments, are defined under different seman-tics. Developments of Dung’s work have also de-fined argument labellings as an alternative way of characterising extensions, and dialectical argument game proof theories for establishing the status of individual arguments. Recently, Extended Argu-mentation Frameworks extend Dung’s theory so that arguments not only attack arguments, but at-tacks themselves. In this way, the extended theory provides an abstract framework for principled inte-gration of meta-level argumentation about defeasi-ble preferences applied to resolve conflicts between object level arguments. In this paper we formalise labellings and argument games for a selection of Dung’s semantics defined for the extended frame-works.