Participation to ECSQARU 2023.

I have participated to ECSQARU 2023, organized in my city of Arras. I had two accepted papers:

Revisiting Approximate Reasoning based on Grounded Semantics (presented by Julien Rossit),
Extension-based Semantics for Incomplete Argumentation Frameworks: Grounded Semantics and Principles (presented by myself).

My ECSQARU 2023 talk. Thanks Eduardo Fermé for the picture!

References

2023

ECSQARU
Revisiting Approximate Reasoning based on Grounded Semantics

Jérôme Delobelle, Jean-Guy Mailly, and Julien Rossit

In Seventeenth European Conference on Symbolic and Quantitative Approaches to Reasoning with Uncertainty (ECSQARU 2023), 2023

Abs Bib HTML

Efficient computation of hard reasoning tasks is a key issue in abstract argumentation. One recent approach consists in defining approximate 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 determining 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 arguments 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.
@inproceedings{ecsqaru2023a, title = {Revisiting Approximate Reasoning based on Grounded Semantics}, booktitle = {Seventeenth {E}uropean {C}onference on {S}ymbolic and {Q}uantitative {A}pproaches to {R}easoning with {U}ncertainty ({ECSQARU} 2023)}, author = {Delobelle, Jérôme and Mailly, Jean-Guy and Rossit, Julien}, year = {2023}, }
ECSQARU
Extension-based Semantics for Incomplete Argumentation Frameworks: Grounded Semantics and Principles

Jean-Guy Mailly

In Seventeenth European Conference on Symbolic and Quantitative Approaches to Reasoning with Uncertainty (ECSQARU 2023), 2023

Abs Bib HTML

Incomplete Argumentation Frameworks (IAFs) enrich classical abstract argumentation with arguments and attacks whose actual existence is questionable. The usual reasoning approaches rely on the notion of completion, i.e. standard AFs representing "possible worlds" compatible with the uncertain information encoded in the IAF. Recently, extension-based semantics for IAFs that do not rely on the notion of completion have been defined, using instead new versions of conflict-freeness and defense that take into account the (certain or uncertain) nature of arguments and attacks. In this paper, we give new insights on this reasoning approach, by adapting the well-known grounded semantics to this framework in two different versions. After determining the computational complexity of our new semantics, we provide a principle-based analysis of these semantics, as well as the ones previously defined in the literature, namely the complete, preferred and stable semantics.
@inproceedings{ecsqaru2023b, title = {Extension-based Semantics for Incomplete Argumentation Frameworks: Grounded Semantics and Principles}, booktitle = {Seventeenth {E}uropean {C}onference on {S}ymbolic and {Q}uantitative {A}pproaches to {R}easoning with {U}ncertainty ({ECSQARU} 2023)}, author = {Mailly, Jean-Guy}, year = {2023}, }