Formal argumentation and modal logic

Abstract

In this article we analyse three different lines of work to combine modal logicand argumentation: a) a logic-based framework that combines dynamic logicand argumentation for value-based planning; b) alternating-time temporal logicextended with coalitional argumentation; c) different combined approaches forintegrating epistemic logics and argumentation. These three alternatives willhelp the reader to understand different interplays that can take place whencombining argumentation and modal logic. On the one hand, we show thatargumentation systems can be combined with very different readings of modaloperators (i.e., dynamic, temporal and epistemic). On the other hand, modallogic and argumentation can be used in different relative positions. When representing and reasoning about plans, modal logic is applied for the reasoningon the object level and a structured argumentation framework is built on themeta-level over modal logic. When epistemically reasoning about opponents’argumentative information, modal logic can be built over argumentation. Forchecking the strategic properties of coalitions of agents, argumentation is putinside modal logic so that the coalition can enlarge according to the theory ofcoalitional argumentation.