1. Prioritized Norms in Formal Argumentation
- Author
-
Serena Villata, Beishui Liao, Nir Oren, Leendert van der Torre, Zhejiang University, University of Aberdeen, Individual and Collective Reasoning (ICR), University of Luxembourg [Luxembourg], Web-Instrumented Man-Machine Interactions, Communities and Semantics (WIMMICS), Inria Sophia Antipolis - Méditerranée (CRISAM), Institut National de Recherche en Informatique et en Automatique (Inria)-Institut National de Recherche en Informatique et en Automatique (Inria)-Scalable and Pervasive softwARe and Knowledge Systems (Laboratoire I3S - SPARKS), Laboratoire d'Informatique, Signaux, et Systèmes de Sophia Antipolis (I3S), Université Nice Sophia Antipolis (1965 - 2019) (UNS), COMUE Université Côte d'Azur (2015-2019) (COMUE UCA)-COMUE Université Côte d'Azur (2015-2019) (COMUE UCA)-Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique (CNRS)-Université Côte d'Azur (UCA)-Université Nice Sophia Antipolis (1965 - 2019) (UNS), COMUE Université Côte d'Azur (2015-2019) (COMUE UCA)-COMUE Université Côte d'Azur (2015-2019) (COMUE UCA)-Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique (CNRS)-Université Côte d'Azur (UCA)-Laboratoire d'Informatique, Signaux, et Systèmes de Sophia Antipolis (I3S), COMUE Université Côte d'Azur (2015-2019) (COMUE UCA)-COMUE Université Côte d'Azur (2015-2019) (COMUE UCA)-Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique (CNRS)-Université Côte d'Azur (UCA), Université Nice Sophia Antipolis (... - 2019) (UNS), COMUE Université Côte d'Azur (2015-2019) (COMUE UCA)-COMUE Université Côte d'Azur (2015-2019) (COMUE UCA)-Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique (CNRS)-Université Côte d'Azur (UCA)-Université Nice Sophia Antipolis (... - 2019) (UNS), Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique (CNRS), The research reported in this paper was partially supported by the Fundamental Research Funds for the Central Universities of China for the project Big Data, Reasoning and Decision Making, the National Research Fund Luxembourg (FNR) under grant INTER/MOBILITY/14/8813732 for the project FMUAT: Formal Models for Uncertain Argumentation from Text, and the European Union’s Horizon 2020 research and innovation programme under the Marie Sklodowska-Curie grant agreement No 690974 for the project MIREL: MIning and REasoning with Legal texts., and European Project: 690974,H2020 Pilier Excellent Science,H2020-MSCA-RISE-2015,MIREL(2016)
- Subjects
FOS: Computer and information sciences ,Logic ,Computer Science - Artificial Intelligence ,Big data ,[SCCO.COMP]Cognitive science/Computer science ,0102 computer and information sciences ,normative multiagent systems ,01 natural sciences ,ComputingMethodologies_ARTIFICIALINTELLIGENCE ,Theoretical Computer Science ,Argumentation theory ,[INFO.INFO-AI]Computer Science [cs]/Artificial Intelligence [cs.AI] ,Arts and Humanities (miscellaneous) ,normative systems ,media_common.cataloged_instance ,European commission ,European union ,China ,Mathematics ,media_common ,deontic logic ,Computer science [C05] [Engineering, computing & technology] ,business.industry ,Deontic logic ,Public relations ,Sciences informatiques [C05] [Ingénierie, informatique & technologie] ,16. Peace & justice ,TheoryofComputation_MATHEMATICALLOGICANDFORMALLANGUAGES ,Artificial Intelligence (cs.AI) ,010201 computation theory & mathematics ,Hardware and Architecture ,Normative systems ,business ,formal argumentation ,Social psychology ,norms ,Software - Abstract
To resolve conflicts among norms, various nonmonotonic formalisms can be used to perform prioritized normative reasoning. Meanwhile, formal argumentation provides a way to represent nonmonotonic logics. In this paper, we propose a representation of prioritized normative reasoning by argumentation. Using hierarchical abstract normative systems, we define three kinds of prioritized normative reasoning approaches, called Greedy, Reduction, and Optimization. Then, after formulating an argumentation theory for a hierarchical abstract normative system, we show that for a totally ordered hierarchical abstract normative system, Greedy and Reduction can be represented in argumentation by applying the weakest link and the last link principles respectively, and Optimization can be represented by introducing additional defeats capturing the idea that for each argument that contains a norm not belonging to the maximal obeyable set then this argument should be rejected., Accepted by the Journal of Logic and Computation on November 2nd, 2017
- Published
- 2017