This paper introduces a multi-agent dynamic epistemic logic for abstract argumenta-
tion. Its main motivation is to build a general framework for modelling the dynamics
of a debate, which entails reasoning about goals, beliefs, as well as policies of com-
munication and information update by the participants. After locating our proposal
and introducing the relevant tools from abstract argumentation, we proceed to build a
three-tiered logical approach. At the first level, we use the language of propositional
logic to encode states of a multi-agent debate. This language allows to specify which
arguments any agent is aware of, as well as their subjective justification status. We
then extend our language and semantics to that of epistemic logic, in order to model
individuals’ beliefs about the state of the debate, which includes uncertainty about the
information available to others. As a third step, we introduce a framework of dynamic
epistemic logic and its semantics, which is essentially based on so-called event models
with factual change. We provide completeness results for a number of systems and
show how existing formalisms for argumentation dynamics and unquantified uncerSynthese
tainty can be reduced to their semantics. The resulting framework allows reasoning
about subtle epistemic and argumentative updates—such as the effects of different
levels of trust in a source—and more in general about the epistemic dimensions of
strategic communication.
Buscar en Dimension