Related papers: Abstractly Interpreting Argumentation Frameworks f…
This paper builds on the recent ASPIC+ formalism, to develop a general framework for argumentation with preferences. We motivate a revised definition of conflict free sets of arguments, adapt ASPIC+ to accommodate a broader range of…
In argumentative discourse, persuasion is often achieved by refuting or attacking others arguments. Attacking is not always straightforward and often comprise complex rhetorical moves such that arguers might agree with a logic of an…
Argumentation is based on the exchange and valuation of interacting arguments, followed by the selection of the most acceptable of them (for example, in order to take a decision, to make a choice). Starting from the framework proposed by…
Recent advances in Large Language Models have demonstrated their capabilities across a variety of tasks. However, automatically extracting implicit knowledge from natural language remains a significant challenge, as machines lack active…
Abstract Dialectical Frameworks (ADFs) are argumentation frameworks where each node is associated with an acceptance condition. This allows us to model different types of dependencies as supports and attacks. Previous studies provided a…
In computational argumentation, gradual semantics are fine-grained alternatives to extension-based and labelling-based semantics . They ascribe a dialectical strength to (components of) arguments sanctioning their degree of acceptability.…
An extension of an abstract argumentation framework, called collective argumentation, is introduced in which the attack relation is defined directly among sets of arguments. The extension turns out to be suitable, in particular, for…
Graph neural networks (GNNs) are powerful graph-based deep-learning models that have gained significant attention and demonstrated remarkable performance in various domains, including natural language processing, drug discovery, and…
E-graphs are a data structure that compactly represents equivalent expressions. They are constructed via the repeated application of rewrite rules. Often in practical applications, conditional rewrite rules are crucial, but their…
Graph-based semantic representations are valuable in natural language processing, where it is often simple and effective to represent linguistic concepts as nodes, and relations as edges between them. Several attempts has been made to find…
Abstract argumentation frameworks are formal systems that facilitate obtaining conclusions from non-monotonic knowledge systems. Within such a system, an argumentation semantics is defined as a set of arguments with some desired qualities,…
A semantic tableau method, called an argumentation tableau, that enables the derivation of arguments, is proposed. First, the derivation of arguments for standard propositional and predicate logic is addressed. Next, an extension that…
In this paper we provide a first analysis of the research questions that arise when dealing with the problem of communicating pieces of formal argumentation through natural language interfaces. It is a generally held opinion that formal…
We study invariant local expansion operators for conflict-free and admissible sets in Abstract Argumentation Frameworks (AFs). Such operators are directly applied on AFs, and are invariant with respect to a chosen "semantics" (that is…
The knowledge graph is a structure to store and represent knowledge, and recent studies have discussed its capability to assist language models for various applications. Some variations of knowledge graphs aim to record arguments and their…
Formal argumentation is being used increasingly in artificial intelligence as an effective and understandable way to model potentially conflicting pieces of information, called arguments, and identify so-called acceptable arguments…
Advances in natural language processing have resulted in increased capabilities with respect to multiple tasks. One of the possible causes of the observed performance gains is the introduction of increasingly sophisticated text…
We show that deciding whether an argument a is stronger than an argument b with respect to the discussion-based semantics of Amgoud and Ben-Naim is decidable in polynomial time. At its core, this problem is about deciding whether, for two…
In quantum logical terms, Hardy-type arguments can be uniformly presented and extended as collections of intertwined contexts and their observables. If interpreted classically those structures serve as graph-theoretic "gadgets" that enforce…
Argumentation theory is a powerful paradigm that formalizes a type of commonsense reasoning that aims to simulate the human ability to resolve a specific problem in an intelligent manner. A classical argumentation process takes into account…