Umeå University's logo

umu.sePublications
Change search
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • ieee
  • vancouver
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf
Ensuring reference independence and cautious monotony in abstract argumentation
Umeå University, Faculty of Science and Technology, Department of Computing Science.ORCID iD: 0000-0002-6458-2252
Umeå University, Faculty of Science and Technology, Department of Computing Science.ORCID iD: 0000-0003-4072-8795
2022 (English)In: International Journal of Approximate Reasoning, ISSN 0888-613X, E-ISSN 1873-4731, Vol. 140, p. 173-210Article in journal (Refereed) Published
Abstract [en]

In the symbolic artificial intelligence community, abstract argumentation with its semantics, i.e. approaches for defining sets of valid conclusions (extensions) that can be derived from argumentation graphs, is considered a promising method for non-monotonic reasoning. However, from a sequential perspective, abstract argumentation-based decision-making processes typically do not guarantee an alignment with common formal notions to assess consistency; in particular, abstract argumentation can, in itself, not enforce the satisfaction of relational principles such as reference independence (based on a key principle of microeconomic theory) and cautious monotony. In this paper, we address this issue by introducing different approaches to ensuring reference independence and cautious monotony in sequential argumentation: a reductionist, an expansionist, and an extension-selecting approach. The first two approaches are generically applicable, but may require comprehensive changes to the corresponding argumentation framework. In contrast, the latter approach guarantees that an extension of the corresponding argumentation framework can be selected to satisfy the relational principle by requiring that the used argumentation semantics is weakly reference independent or weakly cautiously monotonous, respectively, and also satisfies some additional straightforward principles. To highlight the relevance of the approach, we illustrate how the extension-selecting approach to reference independent argumentation can be applied to model (boundedly) rational economic decision-making.

Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
Elsevier, 2022. Vol. 140, p. 173-210
Keywords [en]
Applied Mathematics, Artificial Intelligence, Theoretical Computer Science, Software
National Category
Computer Sciences
Research subject
Computer Science
Identifiers
URN: urn:nbn:se:umu:diva-189163DOI: 10.1016/j.ijar.2021.10.007ISI: 000721007500003Scopus ID: 2-s2.0-85117800047OAI: oai:DiVA.org:umu-189163DiVA, id: diva2:1609125
Funder
Knut and Alice Wallenberg FoundationWallenberg AI, Autonomous Systems and Software Program (WASP)Available from: 2021-11-06 Created: 2021-11-06 Last updated: 2023-09-05Bibliographically approved
In thesis
1. Principle-based non-monotonic reasoning - from humans to machines
Open this publication in new window or tab >>Principle-based non-monotonic reasoning - from humans to machines
2022 (English)Doctoral thesis, comprehensive summary (Other academic)
Alternative title[sv]
Principbaserat icke-monotoniskt resonemang - från människor till maskiner
Abstract [en]

A key challenge when developing intelligent agents is to instill behavior into computing systems that can be considered as intelligent from a common-sense perspective. Such behavior requires agents to diverge from typical decision-making algorithms that strive to maximize simple and often one-dimensional metrics. A striking parallel to this research problemcan be found in the design of formal models of human decision-making in microeconomic theory. Traditionally, mathematical models of human decision-making also reflect the ambition to maximize expected utility or a preference function, which economists refer to as the rational man paradigm. However, evidence suggests that these models are flawed, not only because human decision-making is subject to systematic fallacies, but also because the models depend on assumptions that do not hold in reality. Consequently, the research domain of formally modeling bounded rationality emerged, which attempts to account for these shortcomings by systematically relaxing the mathematical constraints of the formal model of economic rationality. Similarly, in the field of symbolic reasoning, approaches have emerged to systematically relax the notion of monotony of entailment, which stipulates (colloquially speaking) that when inferring a set of statements from a knowledge base, the addition of new knowledge to the knowledge base must not lead to the rejection of any of the previously inferred statements.

By drawing from these developments in microeconomic theory and symbolic reasoning, this thesis explores different principle-based approaches to decision-making and non-monotonic reasoning. Thereby, abstract argumentation is used as a fundamental method for reasoning in face of conflicting knowledge (or: beliefs) that reduces non-monotonic reasoning to the problem of drawing conclusions (extensions) from a directed graph, and hence provides a neat abstraction for theoretical exploration. In particular, the works collected in this thesis i) introduce the consistent preferences property of microeconomic theory, as well as some relaxed forms of monotony of entailment as mathematical principles to abstract argumentation-based inference; ii) show how to enforce some of these principles in dynamic environments; iii) devise a formal approach to maximize monotony of entailment, given the constraints imposed by an inference function; iv) extend and apply the aforementioned approaches to the domains of machine reasoning explainability and legal reasoning.

Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
Umeå: Umeå University, 2022. p. 34
Series
Report / UMINF, ISSN 0348-0542 ; 22.02
Keywords
Non-monotonic reasoning, formal argumentation
National Category
Computer Sciences
Research subject
Computer Science
Identifiers
urn:nbn:se:umu:diva-193460 (URN)978-91-7855-757-8 (ISBN)978-91-7855-758-5 (ISBN)
Public defence
2022-04-29, MA121 (MIT-huset), Umeå University, Umeå, 13:15 (English)
Opponent
Supervisors
Funder
Wallenberg AI, Autonomous Systems and Software Program (WASP)
Note

Digital ISBN missing in publication. 

Available from: 2022-04-08 Created: 2022-04-02 Last updated: 2022-04-04Bibliographically approved

Open Access in DiVA

fulltext(888 kB)271 downloads
File information
File name FULLTEXT01.pdfFile size 888 kBChecksum SHA-512
e8265329cd733983882ddc9174f70366f06ad43abdcc3c05fa478e9ffc34549a3682343a21f56a33c9fb87b672f4d3faf1cfb5a7f471c2c2debac4a169d4f7fe
Type fulltextMimetype application/pdf

Other links

Publisher's full textScopus

Authority records

Kampik, TimotheusNieves, Juan Carlos

Search in DiVA

By author/editor
Kampik, TimotheusNieves, Juan Carlos
By organisation
Department of Computing Science
In the same journal
International Journal of Approximate Reasoning
Computer Sciences

Search outside of DiVA

GoogleGoogle Scholar
Total: 271 downloads
The number of downloads is the sum of all downloads of full texts. It may include eg previous versions that are now no longer available

doi
urn-nbn

Altmetric score

doi
urn-nbn
Total: 558 hits
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • ieee
  • vancouver
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf