BZPEERPapers, people, evidence and research paths
Menu

Discover

SearchFind papers, people, topics, institutions and opportunities from one place.GraphSee how papers, authors, topics and evidence connect.

Research tools

HomeContinue from the papers, people and topics that matter now.CollectionsTurn saved papers into reading lists, evidence maps and shareable context.ResearchReconstruct the path that led you from search to paper to question.CollaborationMove from a paper, topic or expert request into a focused thread.PublishCreate full-text research articles with metadata, formulas and versions.

Network

ExpertsFind specialists whose work and reviews explain why they can help.CommunitiesJoin research groups organized around papers, topics and shared evidence.

Opportunities

ListingsBrowse roles, calls and collaborations connected to real research context.

Account

Log inReturn to your saved papers, graph views and active threads.Create accountStart saving papers, building a research trail and joining teams.
Log inCreate account

Source author record

Wolfgang Dvořák

Wolfgang Dvořák appears in the imported research catalog. Authorship, coauthor and topic links are available while profile ownership is still unclaimed.

ResearcherUnclaimed source record
Artificial IntelligenceData Structures and AlgorithmsLogic in Computer ScienceComputational Complexity

Catalog footprint

What is connected

9works
4topics
4close collaborators

Actions

Connect this record

Log in to claim
Open graphBrowse works

Research graph

See the researcher in context

Open full explorer

Inspect adjacent papers, topics, institutions and collaborators without losing the researcher page.

Building this map preview

BZPEER is loading the nearby papers, people, topics and institutions for this page.

Published work

9 published item(s)

preprint2022arXiv

Rediscovering Argumentation Principles Utilizing Collective Attacks

Argumentation Frameworks (AFs) are a key formalism in AI research. Their semantics have been investigated in terms of principles, which define characteristic properties in order to deliver guidance for analysing established and developing new semantics. Because of the simple structure of AFs, many desired properties hold almost trivially, at the same time hiding interesting concepts behind syntactic notions. We extend the principle-based approach to Argumentation Frameworks with Collective Attacks (SETAFs) and provide a comprehensive overview of common principles for their semantics. Our analysis shows that investigating principles based on decomposing the given SETAF (e.g. directionality or SCC-recursiveness) poses additional challenges in comparison to usual AFs. We introduce the notion of the reduct as well as the modularization principle for SETAFs which will prove beneficial for this kind of investigation. We then demonstrate how our findings can be utilized for incremental computation of extensions and give a novel parameterized tractability result for verifying preferred extensions.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2020arXiv

Expressiveness of SETAFs and Support-Free ADFs under 3-valued Semantics

Generalizing the attack structure in argumentation frameworks (AFs) has been studied in different ways. Most prominently, the binary attack relation of Dung frameworks has been extended to the notion of collective attacks. The resulting formalism is often termed SETAFs. Another approach is provided via abstract dialectical frameworks (ADFs), where acceptance conditions specify the relation between arguments; restricting these conditions naturally allows for so-called support-free ADFs. The aim of the paper is to shed light on the relation between these two different approaches. To this end, we investigate and compare the expressiveness of SETAFs and support-free ADFs under the lens of 3-valued semantics. Our results show that it is only the presence of unsatisfiable acceptance conditions in support-free ADFs that discriminate the two approaches.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2016arXiv

Conditionally Optimal Algorithms for Generalized Büchi Games

Games on graphs provide the appropriate framework to study several central problems in computer science, such as the verification and synthesis of reactive systems. One of the most basic objectives for games on graphs is the liveness (or Büchi) objective that given a target set of vertices requires that some vertex in the target set is visited infinitely often. We study generalized Büchi objectives (i.e., conjunction of liveness objectives), and implications between two generalized Büchi objectives (known as GR(1) objectives), that arise in numerous applications in computer-aided verification. We present improved algorithms and conditional super-linear lower bounds based on widely believed assumptions about the complexity of (A1) combinatorial Boolean matrix multiplication and (A2) CNF-SAT. We consider graph games with $n$ vertices, $m$ edges, and generalized Büchi objectives with $k$ conjunctions. First, we present an algorithm with running time $O(k \cdot n^2)$, improving the previously known $O(k \cdot n \cdot m)$ and $O(k^2 \cdot n^2)$ worst-case bounds. Our algorithm is optimal for dense graphs under (A1). Second, we show that the basic algorithm for the problem is optimal for sparse graphs when the target sets have constant size under (A2). Finally, we consider GR(1) objectives, with $k_1$ conjunctions in the antecedent and $k_2$ conjunctions in the consequent, and present an $O(k_1 \cdot k_2 \cdot n^{2.5})$-time algorithm, improving the previously known $O(k_1 \cdot k_2 \cdot n \cdot m)$-time algorithm for $m > n^{1.5}$.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2016arXiv

Maximizing a Submodular Function with Viability Constraints

We study the problem of maximizing a monotone submodular function with viability constraints. This problem originates from computational biology, where we are given a phylogenetic tree over a set of species and a directed graph, the so-called food web, encoding viability constraints between these species. These food webs usually have constant {depth}. The goal is to select a subset of $k$ species that satisfies the viability constraints and has maximal phylogenetic diversity. As this problem is known to be NP-hard, we investigate approximation algorithms. We present the first constant factor approximation algorithm if the depth is constant. Its approximation ratio is $(1-\frac{1}{\sqrt{e}})$. This algorithm not only applies to phylogenetic trees with viability constraints but for arbitrary monotone submodular set functions with viability constraints. Second, we show that there is no $(1-1/e+ε)$-approximation algorithm for our problem setting (even for additive functions) and that there is no approximation algorithm for a slight extension of this setting.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2016arXiv

Model and Objective Separation with Conditional Lower Bounds: Disjunction is Harder than Conjunction

Given a model of a system and an objective, the model-checking question asks whether the model satisfies the objective. We study polynomial-time problems in two classical models, graphs and Markov Decision Processes (MDPs), with respect to several fundamental $ω$-regular objectives, e.g., Rabin and Streett objectives. For many of these problems the best-known upper bounds are quadratic or cubic, yet no super-linear lower bounds are known. In this work our contributions are two-fold: First, we present several improved algorithms, and second, we present the first conditional super-linear lower bounds based on widely believed assumptions about the complexity of CNF-SAT and combinatorial Boolean matrix multiplication. A separation result for two models with respect to an objective means a conditional lower bound for one model that is strictly higher than the existing upper bound for the other model, and similarly for two objectives with respect to a model. Our results establish the following separation results: (1) A separation of models (graphs and MDPs) for disjunctive queries of reachability and Büchi objectives. (2) Two kinds of separations of objectives, both for graphs and MDPs, namely, (2a) the separation of dual objectives such as reachability/safety (for disjunctive questions) and Streett/Rabin objectives, and (2b) the separation of conjunction and disjunction of multiple objectives of the same type such as safety, Büchi, and coBüchi. In summary, our results establish the first model and objective separation results for graphs and MDPs for various classical $ω$-regular objectives. Quite strikingly, we establish conditional lower bounds for the disjunction of objectives that are strictly higher than the existing upper bounds for the conjunction of the same objectives.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2016arXiv

Online Ad Assignment with an Ad Exchange

Ad exchanges are becoming an increasingly popular way to sell advertisement slots on the internet. An ad exchange is basically a spot market for ad impressions. A publisher who has already signed contracts reserving advertisement impressions on his pages can choose between assigning a new ad impression for a new page view to a contracted advertiser or to sell it at an ad exchange. This leads to an online revenue maximization problem for the publisher. Given a new impression to sell decide whether (a) to assign it to a contracted advertiser and if so to which one or (b) to sell it at the ad exchange and if so at which reserve price. We make no assumptions about the distribution of the advertiser valuations that participate in the ad exchange and show that there exists a simple primal-dual based online algorithm, whose lower bound for the revenue converges to $R_{ADX} + R_A (1 - 1/e)$, where $R_{ADX}$ is the revenue that the optimum algorithm achieves from the ad exchange and $R_A$ is the revenue that the optimum algorithm achieves from the contracted advertisers.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2012arXiv

Technical Note: Exploring Σ^P_2 / Π^P_2-hardness for Argumentation Problems with fixed distance to tractable classes

We study the complexity of reasoning in abstracts argumentation frameworks close to graph classes that allow for efficient reasoning methods, i.e.\ to one of the classes of acyclic, noeven, biparite and symmetric AFs. In this work we show that certain reasoning problems on the second level of the polynomial hierarchy still maintain their full complexity when restricted to instances of fixed distance to one of the above graph classes.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2011arXiv

Making Use of Advances in Answer-Set Programming for Abstract Argumentation Systems

Dung's famous abstract argumentation frameworks represent the core formalism for many problems and applications in the field of argumentation which significantly evolved within the last decade. Recent work in the field has thus focused on implementations for these frameworks, whereby one of the main approaches is to use Answer-Set Programming (ASP). While some of the argumentation semantics can be nicely expressed within the ASP language, others required rather cumbersome encoding techniques. Recent advances in ASP systems, in particular, the metasp optimization frontend for the ASP-package gringo/claspD provides direct commands to filter answer sets satisfying certain subset-minimality (or -maximality) constraints. This allows for much simpler encodings compared to the ones in standard ASP language. In this paper, we experimentally compare the original encodings (for the argumentation semantics based on preferred, semi-stable, and respectively, stage extensions) with new metasp encodings. Moreover, we provide novel encodings for the recently introduced resolution-based grounded semantics. Our experimental results indicate that the metasp approach works well in those cases where the complexity of the encoded problem is adequately mirrored within the metasp approach.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access