All Classes
| Class | Description |
|---|---|
| AFSequence |
Class for generating and managing argumentation sequence objects
|
| AFSequenceTest | |
| AFTuple |
Provides abstractions for argumentation framework tuples.
|
| AFTupleTest | |
| AgreementScenario |
An agreement scenario is an argumentation framework AF = (AR, AT), with a topic
T that is a subset of AR and a sequence of semantics that represent the inference
process of different agents
|
| AgreementScenarioTest | |
| ArgumentValueMapping |
Abstraction to create maps with (argument, value) pairs for value-based argumentation frameworks
|
| BurdenOfPersuasionTheory |
Abstractions and solver for burden of persuasion frameworks
|
| BurdenOfPersuasionTheoryTest | |
| Context |
A context wrapper that allows for the exclusion of the specified arguments from an argumentation framework
|
| ExplanationTestFrameworks |
Contains example argumentation frameworks testing monotony violation explanations
framework1: ({a, b, c, d}, {(a, b), (b, a)})
framework2: ({a, b, c, d, e, f, g}, {(a, b), (b, a), (e, c), (e, d), (e, f), (f, a), (f, e), (f, g), (g, f)})
framework3: ({a, b, c}, {(a, b), (b, a)})
framework4: ({a, b, c, d}, {(a, b), (b, a), (d, c)})
framework5: ({a, b, c, d, e}, {(a, b), (b, a), (b, e), (e, c), (e, d)})
|
| GroundedShkopTest |
Provides nsa grounded Shkop test facilities for DiArg's Shkop reasoner
grounded Shkop test that ignores self-attacking arguments
|
| HandbookTestFrameworks |
Contains Tweety models of all examples of the following book chapter of the Handbook of Formal Argumentation:
Baroni, Pietro, Martin Caminada, and Massimiliano Giacomin.
|
| NonmonotonyExplainer |
Identifies sets of arguments that serve as explanations for the violation of monotony in the context of admissible
set-based semantics.
|
| NonmonotonyExplainerTest | |
| ResolutionType |
Enumerates resolution types, i.e., whether reference independence and cautious monotony should be ensured,
and which approach should be used for ensuring it.
|
| Semantics |
Provides an interface to different abstract argumentation semantics
|
| SemanticsTest | |
| SemanticsType |
Enumerates abstract argumentation semantic types
|
| SequenceType |
Enumerates sequence types, i.e.:
STANDARD: any sequence is allowed;
EXPANDING: a framework needs to be an expansion of its predecessor;
NORMALLY_EXPANDING: a framework needs to be a normal expansion of its predecessor;
SHKOP: a framework needs to be a normal expansion of its predecessor and add exactly one additional argument;
|
| Serializer |
Provides JSON serialization and de-serialization support for argumentation frameworks, extensions, and sequences
|
| SerializerTest | |
| SimpleNSACF2Reasoner |
Implements Rational Conflict-Free (RCF) semantics by providing a wrapper around the Tweety SimpleCF2Reasoner
|
| SimpleRCFReasonerTest | |
| SimpleRSReasoner |
Implements Restricted Stage (RS) semantics by providing a wrapper around the Tweety SimpleStageReasoner
RS semantics are like stage semantics, but:
1.
|
| SimpleRSReasonerTest | |
| SimpleShkopReasoner |
Determines the Shkop extensions, given any argumentation framework AF = (AR, AT), as follows:
1.
|
| SimpleShkopReasonerTest | |
| TestBPFrameworks |
Provides example burden of persuasion frameworks (examples from the paper) for test purposes
bpFramework1: (({a}, {b, c, l}), {(a, c), (a, l), (b, a), (c, b)})
bpFramework2: (({a, b}, {c}, {d, e}), {(a, b), (a, e), (b, a), (b, e), (c, d), (d, c), (e, a), (e, b)})
bpFramework3: (({a, b}, {c, d, e}, {f}), {(a, c), (a, e), (c, d), (d, b), (d, f), (e, a), (e, c), (f, d), (f, b)})
|
| TestFrameworks |
Provides example argumentation frameworks for test purposes
framework1: ({a, b, c, d, e},{(a, b), (b, c), (c, b), (c, d), (d, e), (e, c)})
framework2: ({a, b, c}, {(a, b), (b, a), (b, c), (c, a)})
framework3: ({a, b, c}, {(a, b), (b, c), (c, a)})
framework4: ({a, b}, {(a, b)})
framework5: ({a, b}, {(a, b), (b, a)})
framework6: ({a, b, c, d}, {(a, b), (b, a), (c, d), (d, c)})
framework7: ({a, b, c, d}, {(a, b), (b, c), (c, a), (d, a)})
framework8 ({a, b, c, d}, {(a, b), (b, a), (b, c), (c, d), (d, c)})
framework9: ({a, b, c, d, e}, {(e, a), (d, b), (b, d), (d, c), (c, d), (d, d), (e, e)})
framework10: ({a, b, c, d}, {(a, b), (b, a), (c, b), (d, c)})
|
| TestVBFrameworks |
Provides example value-based argumentation frameworks for test purposes
vbFramework1: ({a, b, c, d},{(a, b), (b, a), (c, b), (c, d)}, {av, bv, cv, dv},
{a → av, b → bv, c → cv, d → dv}, ({av > bv}, {bv > av), {cv > dv}))
|
| Utils |
Utils for manipulating and analyzing argumentation frameworks
|
| UtilsTest | |
| Value |
Atomic item that defines a value for value-based argumentation
|
| ValueBasedAgreementScenario |
Abstraction and solver for value-based agreement scenarios
|
| ValueBasedAgreementScenarioTest | |
| ValueBasedTheory |
Abstractions and solver for value-based argumentation frameworks
|
| ValueBasedTheoryTest | |
| ValuePreference |
Preference between two values, for value-based argumentation frameworks
|
| ValuePreferenceOrder |
Value preference order for value based argumentation
Preference between two values, for value-based argumentation frameworks
|