Related papers: Graduality in Argumentation
In Dung's abstract argumentation, arguments are either acceptable or unacceptable, given a chosen notion of acceptability. This gives a coarse way to compare arguments. In this paper, we propose a counting approach for a more fine-gained…
We make three contributions. First, we formulate a discussion-graph semantics for first-order logic with equality, enabling reasoning about discussion and argumentation in AI more generally than before. This addresses the current lack of a…
Argumentation frameworks, consisting of arguments and an attack relation representing conflicts, are fundamental for formally studying reasoning under conflicting information. We use methods from mathematical logic, specifically…
We define a novel neuro-symbolic framework, argumentative reward learning, which combines preference-based argumentation with existing approaches to reinforcement learning from human feedback. Our method improves prior work by generalising…
In abstract argumentation, multiple argumentation semantics have been proposed that allow to select sets of jointly acceptable arguments from a given argumentation framework, i.e. based only on the attack relation between arguments. The…
In Dung-style abstract argumentation, various semantics capture notions of acceptability of arguments. The admissibility semantics capture the notion that an argument can be consistently defended from any potential counterargument. Weak…
The paper proposes a fresh look at the concept of goal and advances that motivational attitudes like desire, goal and intention are just facets of the broader notion of (acceptable) outcome. We propose to encode the preferences of an agent…
Dung's abstract argumentation theory can be seen as a general framework for non-monotonic reasoning. An important question is then: what is the class of logics that can be subsumed as instantiations of this theory? The goal of this paper is…
The aim of this paper is to propose a many-valued modal framework to formalize reasoning with both graded preferences and propositions, in the style of van Benthem et al.'s classical modal logics for preferences. To do so, we start from Bou…
The act of persuasion, a key component in rhetoric argumentation, may be viewed as a dynamics modifier. We extend Dung's frameworks with acts of persuasion among agents, and consider interactions among attack, persuasion and defence that…
In this paper, we address the problem of change in an abstract argumentation system. We focus on a particular change: the addition of a new argument which interacts with previous arguments. We study the impact of such an addition on the…
As algorithmic decision-making systems become more prevalent in society, ensuring the fairness of these systems is becoming increasingly important. Whilst there has been substantial research in building fair algorithmic decision-making…
Gradual argumentation is a field of symbolic AI which is attracting attention for its ability to support transparent and contestable AI systems. It is considered a useful tool in domains such as decision-making, recommendation, debate…
Affordances, a foundational concept in human-computer interaction and design, have traditionally been explained by direct-perception theories, which assume that individuals perceive action possibilities directly from the environment.…
Recently, ranking-based semantics is proposed to rank-order arguments from the most acceptable to the weakest one(s), which provides a graded assessment to arguments. In general, the ranking on arguments is derived from the strength values…
The use of argumentation in education has been shown to improve critical thinking skills for end-users such as students, and computational models for argumentation have been developed to assist in this process. Although these models are…
We introduce matrix and its block to the Dung's theory of argumentation frameworks. It is showed that each argumentation framework has a matrix representation, and the common extension-based semantics of argumentation framework can be…
An abstract argumentation framework is a commonly used formalism to provide a static representation of a dialogue. However, the order of enunciation of the arguments in an argumentative dialogue is very important and can affect the outcome…
Argumentation is a type of discourse where speakers try to persuade their audience about the reasonableness of a claim by presenting supportive arguments. Most work in argument mining has focused on modeling arguments in monologues. We…
Gradual semantics (GS) have demonstrated great potential in argumentation, in particular for deploying quantitative bipolar argumentation frameworks (QBAFs) in a number of real-world settings, from judgmental forecasting to explainable AI.…