Related papers: Some Supplementaries to The Counting Semantics for…
In the area of claim-based reasoning in abstract argumentation, a claim-based semantics is said to be concurrent in a given framework if all its variants yield the same extensions. In this note, we show that the concurrence problem with…
Some abstract argumentation approaches consider that arguments have a degree of uncertainty, which impacts on the degree of uncertainty of the extensions obtained from a abstract argumentation framework (AAF) under a semantics. In these…
Semantic clusters of a domain form an important feature that can be useful for performing syntactic and semantic disambiguation. Several attempts have been made to extract the semantic clusters of a domain by probabilistic or taxonomic…
This work proposes novel splitting techniques for argumentation formalisms that incorporate supports between defeasible elements. We base our studies on bipolar set-based argumentation frameworks (BSAFs) which generalize argumentation…
Automatic assessment of the quality of arguments has been recognized as a challenging task with significant implications for misinformation and targeted speech. While real-world arguments are tightly anchored in context, existing…
Most of the existing work that focus on the identification of implicit knowledge in arguments generally represent implicit knowledge in the form of commonsense or factual knowledge. However, such knowledge is not sufficient to understand…
We explore denotational interpreters: denotational semantics that produce coinductive traces of a corresponding small-step operational semantics. By parameterising our denotational interpreter over the semantic domain and then varying it,…
Quantitative Bipolar Argumentation Frameworks (QBAFs) provide an alternative approach to computing argument acceptability in Bipolar Argumentation Frameworks (BAFs). Each argument is assigned an initial strength, which is then updated to a…
We introduce a neural semantic parser that converts natural language utterances to intermediate representations in the form of predicate-argument structures, which are induced with a transition system and subsequently mapped to target…
An \textit{abstract argumentation framework} ({\sc af} for short) is a directed graph $(A,R)$ where $A$ is a set of \textit{abstract arguments} and $R\subseteq A \times A$ is the \textit{attack} relation. Let $H=(A,R)$ be an {\sc af}, $S…
Verbs play an important role in the understanding of natural language text. This paper studies the problem of abstracting the subject and object arguments of a verb into a set of noun concepts, known as the "argument concepts". This set of…
In this work, we enrich a formalism for argumentation by including a formal characterization of features related to the knowledge, in order to capture proper reasoning in legal domains. We add meta-data information to the arguments in the…
In this paper we provide two new semantics for proofs in the constructive modal logics CK and CD. The first semantics is given by extending the syntax of combinatorial proofs for propositional intuitionistic logic, in which proofs are…
In this paper we discuss contrastive explanations for formal argumentation - the question why a certain argument (the fact) can be accepted, whilst another argument (the foil) cannot be accepted under various extension-based semantics. The…
We propose a novel factor graph model for argument mining, designed for settings in which the argumentative relations in a document do not necessarily form a tree structure. (This is the case in over 20% of the web comments dataset we…
Argument mining (AM) is defined as the task of automatically identifying and extracting argumentative components (e.g. premises, claims, etc.) and detecting the existing relations among them (i.e., support, attack, no relations). Deep…
Attack-defense trees are a novel methodology for graphical security modeling and assessment. The methodology includes visual, intuitive tree models whose analysis is supported by a rigorous mathematical formalism. Both, the intuitive and…
We revisit the notion of initial sets by Xu and Cayrol, i.e., non-empty minimal admissible sets in abstract argumentation frameworks. Initial sets are a simple concept for analysing conflicts in an abstract argumentation framework and to…
Describing systems in terms of choices and their resulting costs and rewards offers the promise of freeing algorithm designers and programmers from specifying how those choices should be made; in implementations, the choices can be realized…
Large Language Models (LLMs) excel at linear reasoning tasks but remain underexplored on non-linear structures such as those found in natural debates, which are best expressed as argument graphs. We evaluate whether LLMs can approximate…