Extension-based argumentation semantics have been shown to be a suitable approach for performing practical reasoning. Since extension-based argumentation semantics were formalized in terms of relationships between atomic arguments, it has been shown that extension-based argumentation semantics (such as the grounded semantics and stable semantics) can be characterized by logic programming semantics with negation as failure. Recently, it has been shown that argumentation semantics such as the preferred semantics and the CF2 semantics can be characterized in terms of logic programming semantics. In this paper, we make a short overview w.r.t. recent results in the close relationship between extension-based semantics and logic programming semantics with negation as failure. We also show that there is enough evidence to believe that the use of declarative approaches based on logic programming semantics with negation as failure is a practical approach for performing practical reasoning following an argumentation reasoning approach.

Peer Reviewed