Related papers: Weighted Abstract Dialectical Frameworks: Extended…
Recently, Strength-based Argumentation Frameworks (StrAFs) have been proposed to model situations where some quantitative strength is associated with arguments. In this setting, the notion of accrual corresponds to sets of arguments that…
Dung's abstract argumentation framework consists of a set of interacting arguments and a series of semantics for evaluating them. Those semantics partition the powerset of the set of arguments into two classes: extensions and…
After Dung's founding work in Abstract Argumentation Frameworks there has been a growing interest in extending the Dung's semantics in order to describe more complex or real life situations. Several of these approaches take the direction of…
Abstract argumentation frameworks (AFs) are one of the most studied formalisms in AI. In this work, we introduce a certain subclass of AFs which we call compact. Given an extension-based semantics, the corresponding compact AFs are…
After a few decades of development, computational argumentation has become one of the active realms in AI. This paper considers extension-based concrete and abstract semantics of argumentation. For concrete ones, based on Grossi and…
This paper introduces the notion of value-based argumentation frameworks, an extension of the standard argumentation frameworks proposed by Dung, which are able toshow how rational decision is possible in cases where arguments derive their…
Abstract argumentation frameworks (AFs) provide a formal setting to analyze many forms of reasoning with conflicting information. While the expressiveness of general infinite AFs make them a tempting tool for modeling many kinds of…
In this paper, we present a learning-based approach to determining acceptance of arguments under several abstract argumentation semantics. More specifically, we propose an argumentation graph neural network (AGNN) that learns a…
We analyse the expressiveness of the two-valued semantics of abstract argumentation frameworks, normal logic programs and abstract dialectical frameworks. By expressiveness we mean the ability to encode a desired set of two-valued…
This paper presents a novel framework for structured argumentation, named extend argumentative decision graph ($xADG$). It is an extension of argumentative decision graphs built upon Dung's abstract argumentation graphs. The $xADG$…
Argumentation is a very active research field of Artificial Intelligence concerned with the representation and evaluation of arguments used in dialogues between humans and/or artificial agents. Acceptability semantics of formal…
The connection between inconsistent databases and Dung's abstract argumentation framework has recently drawn growing interest. Specifically, an inconsistent database, involving certain types of integrity constraints such as functional and…
The paper develops a formal theory of the degree of justification of arguments, which relies solely on the structure of an argumentation framework, and which can be successfully interfaced with approaches to instantiated argumentation. The…
A gradual semantics takes a weighted argumentation framework as input and outputs a final acceptability degree for each argument, with different semantics performing the computation in different manners. In this work, we consider the…
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.…
Gradual semantics with abstract argumentation provide each argument with a score reflecting its acceptability, i.e. how "much" it is attacked by other arguments. Many different gradual semantics have been proposed in the literature, each…
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…
Dung's abstract framework for argumentation enables a study of the interactions between arguments based solely on an ``attack'' binary relation on the set of arguments. Various ways to solve conflicts between contradictory pieces of…
Assumption-Based Argumentation (ABA) is a well-established formalism for modelling and reasoning over debates, with a wide range of applications. However, the high computational complexity of core reasoning tasks in ABA poses a significant…
Bipolar Argumentation Frameworks (BAFs) admit several interpretations of the support relation and diverging definitions of semantics. Recently, several classes of BAFs have been captured as instances of bipolar Assumption-Based…