Searcharxiv⌕ Search
Home/Archive/arXiv

arXiv · 2512.23507

Encoding higher-order argumentation frameworks with supports to propositional logic systems

Shuai Tang
View original source ↗Read source document ↗Export metadata ↓

Abstract

Argumentation frameworks ($AF$s) have been extensively developed, but existing higher-order bipolar $AF$s suffer from critical limitations: attackers and supporters are restricted to arguments, multi-valued and fuzzy semantics lack unified generalization, and encodings often rely on complex logics with poor interoperability. To address these gaps, this paper proposes a higher-order argumentation framework with supports ($HAFS$), which explicitly allows attacks and supports to act as both targets and sources of interactions. We define a suite of semantics for $HAFS$s, including extension-based semantics, adjacent complete labelling semantics (a 3-valued semantics), and numerical equational semantics ([0,1]-valued semantics). Furthermore, we develop a normal encoding methodology to translate $HAFS$s into propositional logic systems ($\mathcal{PLS}$s): $HAFS$s under complete labelling semantics are encoded into {\L}ukasiewicz's three-valued propositional logic ($\mathcal{PL}_3^L$), and those under equational semantics are encoded into fuzzy $\mathcal{PLS}$s ($\mathcal{PL}_{[0,1]}$) such as G\"odel and Product fuzzy logics. We prove model equivalence between $HAFS$s and their encoded logical formulas, establishing the logical foundation of $HAFS$ semantics. Additionally, we investigate the relationships between 3-valued complete semantics and fuzzy equational semantics, showing that models of fuzzy encoded semantics can be transformed into complete semantics models via ternarization, and vice versa for specific t-norms. This work advances the formalization and logical encoding of higher-order bipolar argumentation, enabling seamless integration with lightweight computational solvers and uniform handling of uncertainty.

Explore related subjects

math.LO

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

Shuai Tang. 2025-12-29. Encoding higher-order argumentation frameworks with supports to propositional logic systems. https://arxiv.org/abs/2512.23507

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related papers

arXiv2026

There is no maximal $K$-degree

The Kolmogorov complexity of a string characterize how complex it is to describe the string. If every prefix of a real $x$ is more complex to describe than every prefix (of the same length) of real $y$, then it is seen as $x$ is more complex to describe than $y$. It is wondered if there is a real $x$ so that no other reals are strictly more complex (to describe) than $x$. The behavior of Kolmogorov complexity functions generated by reals (namely $n\mapsto$ the minimal description length of the real) is quite chaos. Therefore, it is widely believed that there are many reals that are maximally complex to describe. For instance, it is conjectured that all random enough reals have maximal $K$-degree. In this paper, it is shown that there is no real with maximal $K$-degree. Actually, for almost all real $x$, we can uniformly computably find another real whose $K$-degree is strictly above $x$.

math.LO↗
arXiv2026

Quadruples and cubes

We prove, in $\mathsf{ZFC}$, that the $\lambda$-terraced cube relation fails whenever $\lambda$ is an uncountable cardinal. The corresponding terraced relation for quadruples fails for every $\lambda$. If $\lambda$ is $\aleph_0$ then the pretinent terraced relation has consistency strength of at least one Woodin cardinal. We prove positive polarized relations at a successor and a double successor from wondrous ideals. We show, however, that there are no such ideals over two consecutive cardinals simultaneously.

math.LO↗
arXiv2026

Possibilistic Logic over a Logic of Formal Inconsistency

In this article, we have introduced a new possibilistic logic on a logic of formal inconsistency with the aim of developing a possibility theoretic framework to deal with uncertainty and inconsistency meaningfully without leading to a system collapse. We have discussed the syntax and semantics for this logic and have proved the soundness and completeness theorems. A set of new measures of consistency, contradictoriness, and triviality of a set of formulas have been defined. These have then been put to use in an example to show that this framework can provide better means of machine reasoning.

math.LO↗