Christof Spanring

Photo

My site in Liverpool
Agent ART Group
Department of Computer Science
University of Liverpool
Email: c.spanring :-) liv.ac.uk

My site in Vienna
Database and Artificial Intelligence Group
Faculty of Informatics
Technical University of Vienna
Email: christof.spanring :-) tuwien.ac.at

About me

After quite a few years of studying a supposedly wide range of subjects (Mathematics, Jazz Trumpet, Computer Science, Japanology, Philosophy and Life) in January 2013 I finally finished my Mag.rer.nat. in mathematics at University of Vienna, specialising in logic and writing my diploma thesis under external supervision of Stefan Woltran. The subject of Abstract Argumentation seems to have caught my continued interest though, which is why I am now enrolled as a PhD student at Liverpool University, supervisors Paul E. Dunne and Davide Grossi, external supervisor Stefan Woltran, and advisors Sven Schewe and Wiebe van der Hoek.

Professional Activities

Ambassador for Imperial College Computing Student Workshop 2014, 2015.

Research Interests

As far as research is concerned I am mostly dedicated to working on Abstract Argumentation, as its fairly straightforward definitions still provide countless open and interesting questions. At the moment I am working on Intertranslatability and Realizability issues, as well as Properties of Infinite Argumentation Frameworks.

Argumentative Issues of Intertranslatability

argumentation
© Marie-Theres Gallnbrunner

Publications

See also: [ Google Scholar | DBLP | PubDB ]

2016

[10] On rejected arguments and implicit conflicts: The hidden power of argumentation semantics.
Ringo Baumann, Wolfgang Dvořák, Thomas Linsbichler, Christof Spanring, Hannes Strass, and Stefan Woltran.
Artif. Intell., 241: 244-284, 2016.
[ web ]
[9] Perfection in Abstract Argumentation
Christof Spanring
COMMA 2016: 439-446
[ web | pdf ]
[8] Investigating the Relationship between Argumentation Semantics via Signatures
Paul E. Dunne, Thomas Linsbichler, Christof Spanring, Stefan Woltran
IJCAI 2016
[ web ]
[7] Comparing the Expressiveness of Argumentation Semantics
Wolfgang Dvořák, Christof Spanring
Journal of Logic and Computation (JLC)
[ web | abstract | html | pdf ]

2015

[6] Hunt for the Collapse of Semantics in Infinite Argumentation Frameworks
Christof Spanring
2015 Imperial College Computing Student Workshop: 70-77
[ web | pdf ]
[5] The Hidden Power of Argumentation Semantics
Thomas Linsbichler, Christof Spanring, Stefan Woltran
In Elizabeth Black, Sanjay Modgil and Nir Oren, editors, Proceedings of the 3rd International Workshop on Theory and Applications of Formal Argumentation (TAFA 2015), 2015.
[ web | pdf ]
[4] Comparing the Expressiveness of Argumentation Semantics
Wolfgang Dvořák and Christof Spanring
Technical Report DBAI-TR-2015-90, Technische Universität Wien
[ web | pdf ]
[3] Infinite Argumentation Frameworks – On the Existence and Uniqueness of Extensions
Ringo Baumann and Christof Spanring
In Advances in Knowledge Representation, Logic Programming, and Abstract Argumentation. (Festschrift in honor of Gerhard Brewka on the occasion of his 60th birthday)
[ web | pdf ]

2014

[2] Axiom of Choice, Maximal Independent Sets, Argumentation and Dialogue Games Christof Spanring
Imperial College Computing Student Workshop: 91-98
[ web | pdf ]

2012

[1] Comparing the Expressiveness of Argumentation Semantics
Wolfgang Dvořák and Christof Spanring
COMMA 2012: 261-272
[ web | pdf ]

Slides and the kind

2016

[13] Conflicts in Abstract Argumentation
DBAI research seminar
November 10
[ slides (pdf) | abstract ]
One of the most substantial definitions in abstract argumentation is conflict-freeness, which refers to sets of arguments where no member is attacking another. The implicit intuition for conflict thereof is that attacking arguments should not be synchronously acceptable. This intuition turned upside down asks whether not synchronously acceptable pairs of arguments necessarily are in an attack relationship. This work is dedicated to a concise investigation of relations between syntactic conflicts (given by structure) and semantic conflicts (derived from incompatible acceptance states).
[12] Perfection in Abstract Argumentation
COMMA
Potsdam, Germany
September 14
[ slides (pdf) ]
[11] Relations between Syntax and Semantics in Abtract Argumentation
The Second Summer School on Argumentation: Computational and Linguistic Perspectives
Potsdam, Germany
September 9
[ poster (pdf) ]
[10] Conflicts in Abstract Argumentation
Cardiff Argumentation Forum
July 7
[ abstract (pdf) | slides (pdf) ]

2015

[9] Existence Conditions of Extensions in Infinite Argumentation Frameworks
DBAI research seminar
November 26
[ slides (pdf) | abstract ]
As in practice neither available space nor available time are infinite, in computer science we mostly restrict ourselves to the finite cases. Be it instantiation-based databases, be it as of yet unknown reasons, be it curiosity, sometimes letting go of this restriction nonetheless is of interest. In abstract argumentation from the popular semantics only stable might crash (not provide any extension) in the finite case, while others provably don't. It is known that some semantics crash in some infinite cases. In this work we discuss examples of crashing semantics as well as conditions guaranteeing existence of extensions for naive, preferred, stage and semi-stable semantics.
[8] Dialogue Games on Abstract Argumentation Graphs
Pluridisciplinary Workshop on Game Theory
CIMI Toulouse
November 20
[ slides (pdf) ]
[7] Hunt for the Collapse of Semantics in Infinite Argumentation Frameworks
ICCSW 2015
Imperial College London
September 25
[ slides (pdf) ]
[6] Abstract Argumentation, Implicit Conflicts
Postgraduate Workshop 2015
University of Liverpool
May 7
[ slides (pdf) ]
[5] Abstract Argumentation, Implicit Conflicts
Postgraduate Workshop 2015
University of Liverpool
March 26
[ poster (pdf) ]

2014

[4] Axiom of Choice, Maximal Independent Sets, Argumentation and Dialogue Games
PhD students Tea Talk
University of Liverpool
October 3
[ slides (pdf) ]
[3] Axiom of Choice, Maximal Independent Sets, Argumentation and Dialogue Games
ICCSW 2014
Imperial College London
September 25
[ slides (pdf) ]

2013

[2] Trumpet Reincarnations: proofs from the book
Strenge Kammer: turn the corner!
Porgy & Bess, Vienna
May 8
[ part 1 (pdf) | part 2 (svg) ]

2012

[1] Comparing the Expressiveness of Argumentation Semantics
COMMA 2012
Technical University of Vienna
September 11
[ slides (pdf) ]

Awards

2015

[1] Best Reviewer Award
ICCSW 2015
Imperial College London

Previous Demonstrator Assignments

2014