Dialectical Proof Theories for the Credulous Preferred Semantics of Argumentation Frameworks

Claudette Cayrol, Sylvie Doutre, Jérôme Mengin

Abstract: Argumentation is a natural form of reasoning, in which two agents cooperate in order to establish the validity of a given argument that could be used to deduce some conclusion of interest. An interesting semantics for logical systems of argumentation is Dung’s “preferred semantics”, which ameliorates in some ways the better-known stable semantics. In this paper, we present proof theories for the credulous decision problem associated with the preferred semantics: is a given argument in at least one extension of a given argumentation framework? Our proof theories improve on the one by [VP00], in the sense that a proof for a given argument is usually shorter with our system.