拓展无限论证框架的递归分析方法，解决传统方法失效问题
SCC-recursiveness in infinite argumentation (extended version)
- 基于强连通分量递归分解论证结构，适配无限场景
- 发现方向性在一般无限框架中不成立，但有限框架下部分方法有效
- 为处理无限或动态推理系统提供理论基础
论证框架（AFs）是人工智能中建模结构化推理与冲突的基础工具。SCC-递归性是一种经典设计原则，将论证评估按攻击图的强连通分量（SCCs）分解，并从‘高层’到‘低层’递归进行。尽管如 extit{cft}和 extit{stgt}等SCC递归语义在有限AFs上表现良好，但Baumann和Spanring指出其无法可靠推广至无限AFs，因存在良基性问题。本文提出两种方法将SCC递归性扩展至无限情形。我们使用Baroni和Giacomin提出的标准系统评估这些语义，特别发现方向性在一般情况下不成立。随后考察其在有限框架中的行为，发现部分语义满足方向性。这些结果推进了无限论证理论的发展，并为处理无界或演化领域推理系统奠定基础。
原文摘要 · Abstract (English)
Argumentation frameworks (AFs) are a foundational tool in artificial intelligence for modeling structured reasoning and conflict. SCC-recursiveness is a well-known design principle in which the evaluation of arguments is decomposed according to the strongly connected components (SCCs) of the attack graph, proceeding recursively from "higher" to "lower" components. While SCC-recursive semantics such as \cft and \stgt have proven effective for finite AFs, Baumann and Spanring showed the failure of SCC-recursive semantics to generalize reliably to infinite AFs due to issues with well-foundedness. We propose two approaches to extending SCC-recursiveness to the infinite setting. We systematically evaluate these semantics using Baroni and Giacomin's established criteria, showing in particular that directionality fails in general. We then examine these semantics' behavior in finitary frameworks, where we find some of our semantics satisfy directionality. These results advance the theory of infinite argumentation and lay the groundwork for reasoning systems capable of handling unbounded or evolving domains.
Thank you to arXiv for use of its open access interoperability. PaperDance 不是 arXiv 官方产品；中文卡片由大模型生成，请以原文为准。