On Strong Equivalence Notions in Logic Programming and Abstract Argumentation

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2605.14721v1
• Date: Thu, 14 May 2026 11:45:37 GMT
• Title: On Strong Equivalence Notions in Logic Programming and Abstract Argumentation
• Abstract summary: Strong equivalence between knowledge bases ensures the possibility of replacing one with the other without affecting reasoning outcomes.<n>This makes it a crucial property in nonmonotonic formalisms.<n>We introduce a new notion of strong equivalence for logic programs.
• Score: 9.546922368727428
• License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
• Abstract: Strong equivalence between knowledge bases ensures the possibility of replacing one with the other without affecting reasoning outcomes, in any given context. This makes it a crucial property in nonmonotonic formalisms. In particular, the fields of logic programming and abstract argumentation provide primary examples in which this property has been subject to vast investigations. However, while (classes of) logic programs and abstract argumentation frameworks are known to be semantically equivalent in static settings, this alignment breaks in dynamic contexts due to differing notions of update. As a result, strong equivalence does not always carry over from one formalism to the other. In this paper, we carefully investigate this discrepancy and introduce a new notion of strong equivalence for logic programs. Our approach preserves strong equivalence under translation between certain classes of logic programs and both Dung-style and claim-augmented argumentation frameworks, thus restoring compatibility across these formalisms.

Related papers

• Technical Report -- A Context-Sensitive Multi-Level Similarity Framework for First-Order Logic Arguments: An Axiomatic Study [2.599882743586164]
  Similarity in formal argumentation has recently gained attention due to its significance in problems such as argument aggregation in semantics and enthymeme decoding.<n>We introduce a comprehensive framework for FOL argument similarity, built upon: (1) an extended axiomatic foundation; (2) a four-level parametric model covering predicates, literals, clauses, and formulae similarity; and (3) two model families, one syntax-sensitive via language models, both integrating contextual weights for nuanced and explainable similarity.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-04-14T10:05:03Z)
• DivLogicEval: A Framework for Benchmarking Logical Reasoning Evaluation in Large Language Models [58.439517684779936]
  This paper proposes a new classical logic benchmark DivLogicEval, consisting of natural sentences composed of diverse statements in a counterintuitive way.<n>To ensure a more reliable evaluation, we also introduce a new evaluation metric that mitigates the influence of bias and randomness inherent in Large Language Models.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-09-19T04:40:46Z)
• Reasoning is about giving reasons [55.56111618153049]
  We show that we can identify and extract the logical structure of natural language arguments in three popular reasoning datasets with high accuracies.<n>Our approach supports all forms of reasoning that depend on the logical structure of the natural language argument.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-08-20T07:26:53Z)
• An Encoding of Abstract Dialectical Frameworks into Higher-Order Logic [57.24311218570012]
  This approach allows for the computer-assisted analysis of abstract dialectical frameworks. Exemplary applications include the formal analysis and verification of meta-theoretical properties.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-12-08T09:32:26Z)
• Modeling Hierarchical Reasoning Chains by Linking Discourse Units and Key Phrases for Reading Comprehension [80.99865844249106]
  We propose a holistic graph network (HGN) which deals with context at both discourse level and word level, as the basis for logical reasoning. Specifically, node-level and type-level relations, which can be interpreted as bridges in the reasoning process, are modeled by a hierarchical interaction mechanism.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-06-21T07:34:27Z)
• Argumentative Characterizations of (Extended) Disjunctive Logic Programs [7.292741799100455]
  We show that assumption-based argumentation can represent not only normal logic programs, but also disjunctive logic programs and their extensions.<n>We consider some inference rules for disjunction that the core logic of the argumentation frameworks should respect.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-06-12T14:01:38Z)
• Strong Equivalence of Logic Programs with Ordered Disjunction: a Logical Perspective [1.160208922584163]
  Logic Programs with Ordered Disjunction (LPODs) extend classical logic programs with the capability of expressing preferential disjunctions. In this paper we obtain a purely logical characterization of strong equivalence of LPODs as logical equivalence in a four-valued logic. We provide a new proof of the coNP-completeness of strong equivalence for LPODs, which has an interest in its own right since it relies on the special structure of such programs.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-05-10T13:33:32Z)
• Abstract argumentation and answer set programming: two faces of Nelson's logic [7.513733974830771]
  We show that both logic programming and abstract argumentation frameworks can be interpreted in terms of Nelson's constructive logic N4. We do so by formalizing, in this logic, two principles that we call non-contradictory inference and strengthened closed world assumption.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-03-27T22:18:44Z)
• A Formalisation of Abstract Argumentation in Higher-Order Logic [77.34726150561087]
  We present an approach for representing abstract argumentation frameworks based on an encoding into classical higher-order logic. This provides a uniform framework for computer-assisted assessment of abstract argumentation frameworks using interactive and automated reasoning tools.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2021-10-18T10:45:59Z)
• Logic-Driven Context Extension and Data Augmentation for Logical Reasoning of Text [65.24325614642223]
  We propose to understand logical symbols and expressions in the text to arrive at the answer. Based on such logical information, we put forward a context extension framework and a data augmentation algorithm. Our method achieves the state-of-the-art performance, and both logic-driven context extension framework and data augmentation algorithm can help improve the accuracy.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2021-05-08T10:09:36Z)
• Higher-order Logic as Lingua Franca -- Integrating Argumentative Discourse and Deep Logical Analysis [0.0]
  We present an approach towards the deep, pluralistic logical analysis of argumentative discourse. We use state-of-the-art automated reasoning technology for classical higher-order logic.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2020-07-02T11:07:53Z)

This list is automatically generated from the titles and abstracts of the papers in this site.

This site does not guarantee the quality of this site (including all information) and is not responsible for any consequences.