Related papers: Strong Admissibility for Abstract Dialectical Fram…
The traditional abstract domain framework for imperative programs suffers from several shortcomings; in particular it does not allow precise symbolic abstractions. To solve these problems, we propose a new abstract interpretation framework,…
We contemplate a higher-level bipolar abstract argumentation for non-elementary arguments such as: X argues against Ys sincerity with the fact that Y has presented his argument to draw a conclusion C, by omitting other facts which would not…
In formal argumentation, a distinction can be made between extension-based semantics, where sets of arguments are either (jointly) accepted or not, and ranking-based semantics, where grades of acceptability are assigned to arguments.…
Effective field theories (EFTs) are widely considered by physicists to be explanatory and to be the appropriate frameworks for modelling various phenomena at different scales. At the same time, they are known to be approximate, restricted,…
Evaluating argument strength in quantitative argumentation systems has received increasing attention in the field of abstract argumentation. The concept of acceptability degree is widely adopted in gradual semantics, however, it may not be…
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…
Translations between different nonmonotonic formalisms always have been an important topic in the field, in particular to understand the knowledge-representation capabilities those formalisms offer. We provide such an investigation in terms…
In this paper we introduce a novel semantics, called defense semantics, for Dung's abstract argumentation frameworks in terms of a notion of (partial) defence, which is a triple encoding that one argument is (partially) defended by another…
Strong equivalence between knowledge bases ensures the possibility of replacing one with the other without affecting reasoning outcomes, in any given context. This makes it a crucial property in nonmonotonic formalisms. In particular, the…
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…
Dialectical frameworks are a unifying model of formal argumentation, where argumentative relations between arguments are represented by assigning acceptance conditions to atomic arguments. Their generality allow them to cover a number of…
In this paper, we present a general framework for ranking sets of arguments in abstract argumentation based on their plausibility of acceptance. We present a generalisation of Dung's extension semantics as extension-ranking semantics, which…
We present an extension-based approach for computing and verifying preferences in an abstract argumentation system. Although numerous argumentation semantics have been developed previously for identifying acceptable sets of arguments from…
We show that an interesting class of feed-forward neural networks can be understood as quantitative argumentation frameworks. This connection creates a bridge between research in Formal Argumentation and Machine Learning. We generalize the…
Explainable Artificial Intelligence and Formal Argumentation have received significant attention in recent years. Argumentation-based systems often lack explainability while supporting decision-making processes. Counterfactual and…
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…
Large Language Models (LLMs) achieve strong performance in analyzing and generating text, yet they struggle with explicit, transparent, and verifiable reasoning over complex texts such as those containing debates. In particular, they lack…
We provide a novel notion of what it means to be interpretable, looking past the usual association with human understanding. Our key insight is that interpretability is not an absolute concept and so we define it relative to a target model,…
The Resource Description Framework (RDF) is a Semantic Web standard that provides a data language, simply called RDF, as well as a lightweight ontology language, called RDF Schema. We investigate embeddings of RDF in logic and show how…
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…