# Splitting Assumption-Based Argumentation Frameworks

arXiv: https://arxiv.org/abs/2604.27964 · HTML: https://mlsanity.com/paper/2604.27964/

## Key facts

- No citing papers in the map yet (data through 14 Oct 2026).
- Builds on 4 of its 42 references that are in the map.
- First posted on arXiv 30 Apr 2026.

## Builds on (most cited first, 4 of 4)

- [Strategic Argumentation Dialogues for Persuasion: Framework and Experiments Based on Modelling the Beliefs and Concerns of the Persuadee](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2101.11870/) (2021)
- [Instantiations and Computational Aspects of Non-Flat Assumption-based Argumentation](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2404.11431/) (2024)
- [Harnessing Incremental Answer Set Solving for Reasoning in Assumption-Based Argumentation](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2108.04192/) (2021)
- [Expressiveness of SETAFs and Support-Free ADFs under 3-valued Semantics](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2007.03581/) (2020)

## Abstract (arXiv)

Assumption-Based Argumentation (ABA) is a well-established formalism for modelling and reasoning over debates, with a wide range of applications. However, the high computational complexity of core reasoning tasks in ABA poses a significant challenge for its applicability. This issue is further aggravated when ABA frameworks (ABAFs) are instantiated into graph-based argumentation formalisms, such as Dung's Argumentation Frameworks (AFs) and Argumentation Frameworks with Collective Attacks (SETAFs). In knowledge representation and reasoning, a key strategy to address computational intractability is to optimise reasoning over a given knowledge base through divide-and-conquer algorithms. A paradigmatic example of this approach is splitting, where extensions of a given framework are computed incrementally, by restricting the search space to sub-frameworks only, and then combining the obtained results. This approach has been successfully applied to AFs, for which also a parametrised version has been introduced under stable semantics. However, the exponential growth produced by the instantiation might undermine the usefulness of splitting on the argument graphs induced by ABAFs. To address this issue, our work investigates the concept of splitting on the knowledge base rather than on its graph-based instantiation. Furthermore, we generalise splitting to its parametrised version for ABAFs.