{"status":"ok","message-type":"work","message-version":"1.0.0","message":{"indexed":{"date-parts":[[2025,11,1]],"date-time":"2025-11-01T21:36:46Z","timestamp":1762033006085},"reference-count":38,"publisher":"Cambridge University Press (CUP)","issue":"6","license":[{"start":{"date-parts":[[2012,1,25]],"date-time":"2012-01-25T00:00:00Z","timestamp":1327449600000},"content-version":"unspecified","delay-in-days":0,"URL":"https:\/\/www.cambridge.org\/core\/terms"}],"content-domain":{"domain":[],"crossmark-restriction":false},"short-container-title":["Theory and Practice of Logic Programming"],"published-print":{"date-parts":[[2013,11]]},"abstract":"<jats:title>Abstract<\/jats:title><jats:p>This article is devoted to the study of methods to change defeasible logic programs (de.l.p.s) which are the knowledge bases used by the Defeasible Logic Programming (D<jats:sc>e<\/jats:sc>LP) interpreter. D<jats:sc>e<\/jats:sc>LP is an argumentation formalism that allows to reason over potentially inconsistent de.l.p.s. Argument Theory Change (ATC) studies certain aspects of belief revision in order to make them suitable for abstract argumentation systems. In this article, abstract arguments are rendered concrete by using the particular rule-based defeasible logic adopted by D<jats:sc>e<\/jats:sc>LP. The objective of our proposal is to define prioritized argument revision operators <jats:italic>\u00e0 la<\/jats:italic> ATC for de.l.p.s, in such a way that the newly inserted argument ends up undefeated after the revision, thus warranting its conclusion. In order to ensure this warrant, the de.l.p. has to be changed in concordance with a minimal change principle. To this end, we discuss different minimal change criteria that could be adopted. Finally, an algorithm is presented, implementing the argument revision operations.<\/jats:p>","DOI":"10.1017\/s1471068411000603","type":"journal-article","created":{"date-parts":[[2012,1,25]],"date-time":"2012-01-25T06:32:14Z","timestamp":1327473134000},"page":"893-957","source":"Crossref","is-referenced-by-count":11,"title":["Dynamics of knowledge in <i>D<scp>e<\/scp>LP<\/i> through Argument Theory Change"],"prefix":"10.1017","volume":"13","author":[{"given":"MART\u00cdN O.","family":"MOGUILLANSKY","sequence":"first","affiliation":[],"role":[{"role":"author","vocabulary":"crossref"}]},{"given":"NICOL\u00c1S D.","family":"ROTSTEIN","sequence":"additional","affiliation":[],"role":[{"role":"author","vocabulary":"crossref"}]},{"given":"MARCELO A.","family":"FALAPPA","sequence":"additional","affiliation":[],"role":[{"role":"author","vocabulary":"crossref"}]},{"given":"ALEJANDRO J.","family":"GARC\u00cdA","sequence":"additional","affiliation":[],"role":[{"role":"author","vocabulary":"crossref"}]},{"given":"GUILLERMO R.","family":"SIMARI","sequence":"additional","affiliation":[],"role":[{"role":"author","vocabulary":"crossref"}]}],"member":"56","published-online":{"date-parts":[[2012,1,25]]},"reference":[{"key":"S1471068411000603_ref2","volume-title":"Proceedings. of COMMA 2010","author":"Baroni","year":"2010"},{"key":"S1471068411000603_ref18","first-page":"95","article-title":"Defeasible logic programming: An argumentative approach","volume":"4","author":"Garc\u00eda","year":"2004","journal-title":"TPLP"},{"key":"S1471068411000603_ref24","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1080\/11663081.1997.10510904"},{"key":"S1471068411000603_ref17","unstructured":"Garc\u00eda A. J. , Rotstein N. D. and Simari G. R. 2007. Dialectical explanations in defeasible argumentation. In ECSQARU, 295\u2013307."},{"key":"S1471068411000603_ref15","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1016\/S0004-3702(02)00258-8"},{"key":"S1471068411000603_ref34","unstructured":"Rotstein N. , Moguillansky M. , Garc\u00eda A. and Simari G. 2010. A dynamic abstract argumentation framework. See Baroni et al. (2010), 427\u2013438."},{"key":"S1471068411000603_ref13","first-page":"411","volume-title":"Proceedings. of the 11th International Conference on Principles of Knowledge Representation and Reasoning","author":"Delgrande","year":"2008"},{"key":"S1471068411000603_ref4","first-page":"1449","volume-title":"Proceedings. of IJCAI'95","author":"Benferhat","year":"1995"},{"key":"S1471068411000603_ref22","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1007\/BF01054039"},{"key":"S1471068411000603_ref20","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1080\/08839510903448692"},{"key":"S1471068411000603_ref11","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1145\/371578.371581"},{"key":"S1471068411000603_ref38","first-page":"381","volume-title":"COMMA","author":"Thimm","year":"2008"},{"key":"S1471068411000603_ref16","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1007\/978-0-387-98197-0_8"},{"key":"S1471068411000603_ref1","first-page":"510","volume":"50","author":"Alchourr\u00f3n","year":"1985","journal-title":"On the logic of theory change: Partial meet contraction and revision functions. The Journal of Symbolic Logic"},{"key":"S1471068411000603_ref8","unstructured":"Boella G. , Costa Perera, C. D. , Tettamanzi A. and van der Torre L. 2008b. Making others believe what they want. Artificial Intelligence in Theory and Practice II, 215\u2013224."},{"key":"S1471068411000603_ref6","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1007\/s10458-008-9074-5"},{"key":"S1471068411000603_ref3","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1016\/j.artint.2007.04.004"},{"key":"S1471068411000603_ref9","first-page":"124","volume-title":"Proceedings. of The International Conference on Principles of Knowledge Representation and Reasoning, KR 2008","author":"Cayrol","year":"2008"},{"key":"S1471068411000603_ref21","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1007\/BF00370186"},{"key":"S1471068411000603_ref27","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1007\/BF00485649"},{"key":"S1471068411000603_ref19","first-page":"203","article-title":"An epistemic approach to conditionals","volume":"18","author":"G\u00e4rdenfors","year":"1981","journal-title":"American Philosophical Quarterly"},{"key":"S1471068411000603_ref14","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1016\/0004-3702(94)00041-X"},{"key":"S1471068411000603_ref12","first-page":"475","volume-title":"AAAI","author":"Dalal","year":"1988"},{"key":"S1471068411000603_ref25","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1007\/978-94-007-0814-3"},{"key":"S1471068411000603_ref10","first-page":"53","volume-title":"Frontiers in Artificial Intelligence and Applications","author":"Ches\u00f1evar","year":"2007"},{"key":"S1471068411000603_ref23","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.2307\/2275912"},{"key":"S1471068411000603_ref37","first-page":"336","volume-title":"COMMA (Computational Models of Argument)","author":"Rotstein","year":"2008"},{"key":"S1471068411000603_ref26","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1023\/A:1014654208944"},{"key":"S1471068411000603_ref35","unstructured":"Rotstein N. , Moguillansky M. and Simari G. 2009. Dialectical abstract argumentation: A characterization of the marking criterion. In Proceedings of the Twenty-first International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence (IJCAI 2009), 898\u2013903."},{"key":"S1471068411000603_ref29","unstructured":"Moguillansky M. , Wassermann R. and Falappa M. 2011. Inconsistent-tolerant base revision through argument theory change. Logic Journal of the IGPL (JIGPAL). URL: http:\/\/jigpal.oxfordjournals.org\/content\/early\/2011\/06\/10\/jigpal.jzr029.abstract?keytype=ref&ijkey=qhOYI0yUs5zdSz9"},{"key":"S1471068411000603_ref31","first-page":"359","volume-title":"The Toulmin Test: Framing Argumentation within Belief Revision Theories","author":"Paglieri","year":"2006"},{"key":"S1471068411000603_ref32","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1023\/A:1005220010407"},{"key":"S1471068411000603_ref7","volume-title":"5th International Workshop on Argumentation in Multi-Agent Systems, ArgMAS 2008","author":"Boella","year":"2008"},{"key":"S1471068411000603_ref33","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1007\/978-94-017-0456-4_3"},{"key":"S1471068411000603_ref28","first-page":"132","volume-title":"AAAI 2008","author":"Moguillansky","year":"2008"},{"key":"S1471068411000603_ref36","first-page":"136","volume-title":"AAAI 2007","author":"Rotstein","year":"2007"},{"key":"S1471068411000603_ref5","unstructured":"Billington D. , Antoniou G. , Governatori G. and Maher M. 1999. Revising nonmonotonic theories: The case of defeasible logic. KI-99: Advances in Artificial Intelligence, 695\u2013695."},{"key":"S1471068411000603_ref30","unstructured":"Moguillansky M. O. , Rotstein N. D. , Falappa M. A. , Garc\u00eda A. J. and Simari G. R. 2010. Argument theory change through defeater activation. See Baroni et al. (2010), 359\u2013366."}],"container-title":["Theory and Practice of Logic Programming"],"original-title":[],"language":"en","link":[{"URL":"https:\/\/www.cambridge.org\/core\/services\/aop-cambridge-core\/content\/view\/S1471068411000603","content-type":"unspecified","content-version":"vor","intended-application":"similarity-checking"}],"deposited":{"date-parts":[[2019,4,23]],"date-time":"2019-04-23T15:06:19Z","timestamp":1556031979000},"score":1,"resource":{"primary":{"URL":"https:\/\/www.cambridge.org\/core\/product\/identifier\/S1471068411000603\/type\/journal_article"}},"subtitle":[],"short-title":[],"issued":{"date-parts":[[2012,1,25]]},"references-count":38,"journal-issue":{"issue":"6","published-print":{"date-parts":[[2013,11]]}},"alternative-id":["S1471068411000603"],"URL":"https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1017\/s1471068411000603","relation":{},"ISSN":["1471-0684","1475-3081"],"issn-type":[{"value":"1471-0684","type":"print"},{"value":"1475-3081","type":"electronic"}],"subject":[],"published":{"date-parts":[[2012,1,25]]}}}