On the Impact of Configuration on Abstract Argumentation Automated Reasoning

Federico Cerutti, Mauro Vallati, Massimiliano Giacomin

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

3 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

In this paper we consider the impact of configuration of abstract argumentation reasoners both when using a single solver and choosing combinations of framework representation–solver options; and also when composing portfolios of algorithms.

To exemplify the impact of the framework–solver configuration we consider one of the most configurable solvers, namely ArgSemSAT—runner-up of the last competition on computational models of argumentation (ICCMA-15)—for enumerating preferred extensions. We discuss how to configure the representation of the argumentation framework in the input file and show how this coupled framework–solver configuration can have a remarkable impact on performance.

As to the impact of configuring differently structured portfolios of abstract argumentation solvers, we consider the solvers submitted to ICCMA-15, which provided the community with a heterogeneous panorama of approaches for handling abstract argumentation frameworks. A superficial reading of the results of ICCMA-15 is that reduction-based systems (either SAT-based or ASP-based) are always the most efficient. Our investigation, concerning the enumeration of stable and preferred extensions, shows that this is not true in full generality and suggests the areas where the relatively under-developed non reduction-based systems should focus more to improve their performance. Moreover, it also highlights that the state-of-the-art solvers are very complementary and can be successfully combined in portfolios.
LanguageEnglish
Pages120-138
Number of pages19
JournalInternational Journal of Approximate Reasoning
Volume92
Early online date6 Oct 2017
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - Jan 2018

Fingerprint

Automated Reasoning
Argumentation
Configuration
Computational Model
Enumeration
Framework

Cite this

@article{b0a3e5dd4651413e8f87e9583455c79b,
title = "On the Impact of Configuration on Abstract Argumentation Automated Reasoning",
abstract = "In this paper we consider the impact of configuration of abstract argumentation reasoners both when using a single solver and choosing combinations of framework representation–solver options; and also when composing portfolios of algorithms.To exemplify the impact of the framework–solver configuration we consider one of the most configurable solvers, namely ArgSemSAT—runner-up of the last competition on computational models of argumentation (ICCMA-15)—for enumerating preferred extensions. We discuss how to configure the representation of the argumentation framework in the input file and show how this coupled framework–solver configuration can have a remarkable impact on performance.As to the impact of configuring differently structured portfolios of abstract argumentation solvers, we consider the solvers submitted to ICCMA-15, which provided the community with a heterogeneous panorama of approaches for handling abstract argumentation frameworks. A superficial reading of the results of ICCMA-15 is that reduction-based systems (either SAT-based or ASP-based) are always the most efficient. Our investigation, concerning the enumeration of stable and preferred extensions, shows that this is not true in full generality and suggests the areas where the relatively under-developed non reduction-based systems should focus more to improve their performance. Moreover, it also highlights that the state-of-the-art solvers are very complementary and can be successfully combined in portfolios.",
keywords = "Abstract argumentation, Solvers for argumentation problems, Automatic configuration, Portfolios methods for argumentation",
author = "Federico Cerutti and Mauro Vallati and Massimiliano Giacomin",
year = "2018",
month = "1",
doi = "10.1016/j.ijar.2017.10.002",
language = "English",
volume = "92",
pages = "120--138",
journal = "International Journal of Approximate Reasoning",
issn = "0888-613X",
publisher = "Elsevier Inc.",

}

On the Impact of Configuration on Abstract Argumentation Automated Reasoning. / Cerutti, Federico; Vallati, Mauro; Giacomin, Massimiliano.

In: International Journal of Approximate Reasoning, Vol. 92, 01.2018, p. 120-138.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

TY - JOUR

T1 - On the Impact of Configuration on Abstract Argumentation Automated Reasoning

AU - Cerutti, Federico

AU - Vallati, Mauro

AU - Giacomin, Massimiliano

PY - 2018/1

Y1 - 2018/1

N2 - In this paper we consider the impact of configuration of abstract argumentation reasoners both when using a single solver and choosing combinations of framework representation–solver options; and also when composing portfolios of algorithms.To exemplify the impact of the framework–solver configuration we consider one of the most configurable solvers, namely ArgSemSAT—runner-up of the last competition on computational models of argumentation (ICCMA-15)—for enumerating preferred extensions. We discuss how to configure the representation of the argumentation framework in the input file and show how this coupled framework–solver configuration can have a remarkable impact on performance.As to the impact of configuring differently structured portfolios of abstract argumentation solvers, we consider the solvers submitted to ICCMA-15, which provided the community with a heterogeneous panorama of approaches for handling abstract argumentation frameworks. A superficial reading of the results of ICCMA-15 is that reduction-based systems (either SAT-based or ASP-based) are always the most efficient. Our investigation, concerning the enumeration of stable and preferred extensions, shows that this is not true in full generality and suggests the areas where the relatively under-developed non reduction-based systems should focus more to improve their performance. Moreover, it also highlights that the state-of-the-art solvers are very complementary and can be successfully combined in portfolios.

AB - In this paper we consider the impact of configuration of abstract argumentation reasoners both when using a single solver and choosing combinations of framework representation–solver options; and also when composing portfolios of algorithms.To exemplify the impact of the framework–solver configuration we consider one of the most configurable solvers, namely ArgSemSAT—runner-up of the last competition on computational models of argumentation (ICCMA-15)—for enumerating preferred extensions. We discuss how to configure the representation of the argumentation framework in the input file and show how this coupled framework–solver configuration can have a remarkable impact on performance.As to the impact of configuring differently structured portfolios of abstract argumentation solvers, we consider the solvers submitted to ICCMA-15, which provided the community with a heterogeneous panorama of approaches for handling abstract argumentation frameworks. A superficial reading of the results of ICCMA-15 is that reduction-based systems (either SAT-based or ASP-based) are always the most efficient. Our investigation, concerning the enumeration of stable and preferred extensions, shows that this is not true in full generality and suggests the areas where the relatively under-developed non reduction-based systems should focus more to improve their performance. Moreover, it also highlights that the state-of-the-art solvers are very complementary and can be successfully combined in portfolios.

KW - Abstract argumentation

KW - Solvers for argumentation problems

KW - Automatic configuration

KW - Portfolios methods for argumentation

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85031805546&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1016/j.ijar.2017.10.002

DO - 10.1016/j.ijar.2017.10.002

M3 - Article

VL - 92

SP - 120

EP - 138

JO - International Journal of Approximate Reasoning

T2 - International Journal of Approximate Reasoning

JF - International Journal of Approximate Reasoning

SN - 0888-613X

ER -