The paper introduces the notion of an epistemic argumentation framework (EAF) as a means to integrate the beliefs of a reasoner with argumentation. Intuitively, an EAF encodes the beliefs of an agent who reasons about arguments. Formally, an EAF is a pair of an argumentation framework and an epistemic constraint. The semantics of the EAF is defined by the notion of an ω-epistemic labelling set, where ω is complete, stable, grounded, or preferred, which is a set of ω-labellings that collectively satisfies the epistemic constraint of the EAF. The paper shows how EAF can represent different views of reasoners on the same argumentation framework. It also includes representing preferences in EAF and multi-agent argumentation.

This paper introduces epistemic graphs as a generalization of the epistemic approach to probabilistic argumentation. In these graphs, an argument can be believed or disbelieved up to a given degree, thus providing a more fine--grained alternative to the standard Dung's approaches when it comes to determining the status of a given argument. Furthermore, the flexibility of the epistemic approach allows us to both model the rationale behind the existing semantics as well as completely deviate from them when required. Epistemic graphs can model both attack and support as well as relations that are neither support nor attack. The way other arguments influence a given argument is expressed by the epistemic constraints that can restrict the belief we have in an argument with a varying degree of specificity. The fact that we can specify the rules under which arguments should be evaluated and we can include constraints between unrelated arguments permits the framework to be more context--sensitive. It also allows for better modelling of imperfect agents, which can be important in multi--agent applications.

Planning with epistemic goals has received attention from both the dynamic logic and planning communities. In the single-agent case, under the epistemic closed-world assumption (ECWA), epistemic planning can be reduced to contingent planning. However, it is inappropriate to make the ECWA in some epistemic planning scenarios, for example, when the agent is not fully introspective, or when the agent wants to devise a generic plan that applies to a wide range of situations. In this paper, we propose a complete single-agent epistemic planner without the ECWA. We identify two normal forms of epistemic formulas: weak minimal epistemic DNF and weak minimal epistemic CNF, and present the progression and entailment algorithms based on these normal forms. We adapt the PrAO algorithm for contingent planning from the literature as the main planning algorithm and develop a complete epistemic planner called EPK. Our experimental results show that EPK can generate solutions effectively for most of the epistemic planning problems we have considered including those without the ECWA.