Inconsistent Databases and Argumentation Frameworks with Collective Attacks
The connection between subset-maximal repairs for inconsistent databases involving various integrity constraints and acceptable sets of arguments within argumentation frameworks has recently drawn growing interest. In this paper, we contribute to this domain by establishing a new connection when integrity constraints (ICs) include denial constraints and local-as-view tuple-generating dependencies. It turns out that SET-based Argumentation Frameworks (SETAFs), an extension of Dung's argumentation frameworks (AFs) allowing collective attacks, are needed. It is known that subset-maximal repairs under denial constraints correspond to the naive extensions, which also coincide with the preferre...
| Authors | Yasir Mahmood, Jonni Virtema, Timon Barlag et al. |
|---|---|
| Primary category | cs.DB |
| Published | 5 May 2026 |
| Last updated at source | 5 May 2026 |
Silytics shows public metadata from arXiv and links to the original. Information may be incomplete or out of date. Last refreshed 17 October 2026. Licenses and terms of the original apply to the work itself. Not financial, legal or professional advice.