Dynamic epistemic logics for abstract argumentation
This paper introduces a multi-agent dynamic epistemic logic for abstract argumentation. Its main motivation is to build a general framework for modelling the dynamics of a debate, which entails reasoning about goals, beliefs, as well as policies of communication and information update by the partici...
| Authors: | , |
|---|---|
| Format: | article |
| Publication Date: | 2021 |
| Country: | España |
| Institution: | Universidad Complutense de Madrid (UCM) |
| Repository: | Docta Complutense |
| Language: | English |
| OAI Identifier: | oai:docta.ucm.es:20.500.14352/98404 |
| Online Access: | https://hdl.handle.net/20.500.14352/98404 |
| Access Level: | Open access |
| Keyword: | 17 Abstract argumentation Dynamic epistemic logic Awareness logics Multi-agent argumentation frameworks Persuasion Strategic argumentation Lógica (Filosofía) 1102.03 Lógica Formal |
| Summary: | This paper introduces a multi-agent dynamic epistemic logic for abstract argumentation. Its main motivation is to build a general framework for modelling the dynamics of a debate, which entails reasoning about goals, beliefs, as well as policies of communication and information update by the participants. After locating our proposal and introducing the relevant tools from abstract argumentation, we proceed to build a three-tiered logical approach. At the first level, we use the language of propositional logic to encode states of a multi-agent debate. This language allows to specify which arguments any agent is aware of, as well as their subjective justification status. We then extend our language and semantics to that of epistemic logic, in order to model individuals’ beliefs about the state of the debate, which includes uncertainty about the information available to others. As a third step, we introduce a framework of dynamic epistemic logic and its semantics, which is essentially based on so-called event models with factual change. We provide completeness results for a number of systems and show how existing formalisms for argumentation dynamics and unquantified uncertainty can be reduced to their semantics. The resulting framework allows reasoning about subtle epistemic and argumentative updates—such as the effects of different levels of trust in a source—and more in general about the epistemic dimensions of strategic communication. |
|---|