Relevance for Stability of Verification Status of a Set of Arguments in Incomplete Argumentation Frameworks (with Proofs)
원문 초록
The notion of relevance was proposed for stability of justification status of a single argument in incomplete argumentation frameworks (IAFs) in 2024 by Odekerken et al. To extend the notion, we study the relevance for stability of verification status of a set of arguments in this paper, i.e., the uncertainties in an IAF that have to be resolved in some situations so that answering whether a given set of arguments is an extension obtains the same result in every completion of the IAF. Further we propose the notion of strong relevance for describing the necessity of resolution in all situations reaching stability. An analysis of complexity reveals that detecting the (strong) relevance for stability of sets of arguments can be accomplished in P time under the most semantics discussed in the paper. We also discuss the difficulty in finding tractable methods for relevance detection under grounded semantics.
함께 살펴볼 논문
공통 태그를 근거로 연결했습니다. 실제 인용 관계나 논문의 우수성을 뜻하지 않습니다.
FunctionChat-Bench: Comprehensive Evaluation of Language Models' Generative Capabilities in Korean Tool-use Dialogs
Benchmarking the Performance of Bayesian Optimization across Multiple Experimental Materials Science Domains
A-MAL: Automatic Movement Assessment Learning from Properly Performed Movements in 3D Skeleton Videos
A Simple Approach to Learn Polysemous Word Embeddings
Using External knowledge to Enhanced PLM for Semantic Matching
Enhancing Function-Calling Capabilities in LLMs: Strategies for Prompt Formats, Data Integration, and Multilingual Translation
토론
이 논문과 연결된 포럼 글이 아직 없습니다.