Uses of Class
org.tweetyproject.arg.dung.principles.Principle

Packages that use Principle

Package	Description
org.tweetyproject.arg.dung.principles

Uses of Principle in org.tweetyproject.arg.dung.principles

Subclasses of Principle in org.tweetyproject.arg.dung.principles

Modifier and Type	Class	Description
class	AdmissibilityPrinciple	Admissibility Principle A semantics satisfies admissibility if for all extensions E it holds that: every argument in E is defended by E see Baroni, P., and Giacomin, M.
class	CFReinstatementPrinciple	CF-Reinstatement Principle A semantics satisfies cf-reinstatement if for all extensions E it holds that: for all arguments a, if E u {a} is conflict-free and E defends a, then a is in E see: Baroni, P., and Giacomin, M.
class	ConflictFreePrinciple	Conflict-free Principle A semantics satisfies conflict-freeness if for all extensions E it holds that: E is conflict-free trivial property satisfied by practically all semantics see: Baroni, P., and Giacomin, M.
class	DirectionalityPrinciple	Directionality Principle A semantics satisfies directionality if for every unattacked set U in a dung theory F it holds that: The extensions of F restricted to U are equal to the extensions of F intersected with U see: Baroni, P., and Giacomin, M.
class	IMaximalityPrinciple	I-Maximality Principle A semantics satisfies I-Maximality iff for all pairs of extensions E1, E2 it holds that: if E1 is a subset of E2, then E1 = E2 see: Baroni, P., and Giacomin, M.
class	INRAPrinciple	Irrelevance of Necessarily Rejected Arguments (INRA) Principle A semantics s satisfies INRA if for every AF F it holds that: for every argument a in F, if every s-extension attacks a, then s(F) = s(F\{a}) i.e if an argument is attacked by every extension, then it does not influence the computation of extensions and can be ignored see: Cramer, M., and van der Torre, L.
class	ModularizationPrinciple	Modularization Principle A semantics s satisfies modularization iff for every AF F we have: if E1 is a s-extension of F and E2 is a s-extension of the E1-reduct of F, then (E1 u E2) is a s-extension of F see: Baumann et.
class	NaivetyPrinciple	Naivety Principle A semantics satisfies naivety if for all extensions E it holds that: E is conflict-free and maximal w.r.t set inclusion see: TODO
class	ReductAdmissibilityPrinciple	Reduct-Admissibility Principle A semantics satisfies reduct admissibility iff for every AF F and every extension E we have: For all arguments a in E: if an argument b attacks a, then b is in no extension of the E-reduct of F see: Dauphin, Jeremie, Tjitze Rienstra, and Leendert Van Der Torre.
class	ReinstatementPrinciple	Reinstatement Principle A semantics satisfies reinstatement if for all extensions E it holds that: for all arguments a, if E defends a, then a is in E i.e E is a complete extension see: Baroni, P., and Giacomin, M.
class	SccDecomposabilityPrinciple	SCC Decomposability Principle also: SCC-Recursiveness A semantics satisfies SCC decomposability iff for all AFs we have: The extensions of F are the same as computing the extensions of each SCC individually and combining the result see: Pietro Baroni et al.
class	SCOOCPrinciple	Strong Complete Completeness Outside Odd Cycles Principle (SCOOC) A semantics satisfied SCOOC if for every extension E it holds that: for every argument a, if neither a nor its attackers are in an odd cycle and E does not attack a, then a is in E.
class	SemiQualifiedAdmissibilityPrinciple	Semi-Qualified Admissibility Principle A semantics s satisfies semi-qualified admissibility iff for every AF F and every s-extension E we have: For all arguments a in E: if an argument b attacks a and b is in any s-extension, then E attacks b see: Dauphin, Jeremie, Tjitze Rienstra, and Leendert Van Der Torre.
class	StrongAdmissibilityPrinciple	Principle of Strong Admissibility A semantics satisfies strong admissibility iff for every extensions E in every AF it holds that: all arguments in E are strongly defended by E, i.e.
class	WeakReinstatementPrinciple	Weak Reinstatement Principle A semantics satisfies weak reinstatement if for all extensions E it holds that: if E strongly defends an argument a, then a is in E An argument a is strongly defended by E iff some argument in E \ {a} defends a see: Baroni, P., and Giacomin, M.

Fields in org.tweetyproject.arg.dung.principles declared as Principle

Modifier and Type	Field	Description
static final Principle	Principle.ADMISSIBILITY	The admissibility principle
static final Principle	Principle.CF_REINSTATEMENT	The CF-reinstatement principle
static final Principle	Principle.CONFLICT_FREE	The conflict-free principle
static final Principle	Principle.DIRECTIONALITY	The directionality principle
static final Principle	Principle.I_MAXIMALITY	The I-maximality principle
static final Principle	Principle.INRA	The Irrelevance of Necessarily Rejected Arguments (INRA) principle
static final Principle	Principle.MODULARIZATION	The modularization principle
static final Principle	Principle.NAIVETY	The naivety principle
static final Principle	Principle.REDUCT_ADM	The reduct admissibility principle
static final Principle	Principle.REINSTATEMENT	The reinstatement principle
static final Principle	Principle.SCC_DECOMPOSABILITY	The SCC decomposability principle
static final Principle	Principle.SCOOC	The Strong Completeness Outside Odd Cycles (SCOOC) principle
static final Principle	Principle.SEMIQUAL_ADM	The semi qualified admissibility principle
static final Principle	Principle.STRONG_ADMISSIBILITY	The strong admissibility principle
static final Principle	Principle.WEAK_REINSTATEMENT	The weak reinstatement principle