Related papers: Forecasting Argumentation Frameworks
Factorization-based models have gained popularity since the Netflix challenge {(2007)}. Since that, various factorization-based models have been developed and these models have been proven to be efficient in predicting users' ratings…
A Timed Argumentation Framework (TAF) is a formalism where arguments are only valid for consideration in a given period of time, called availability intervals, which are defined for every individual argument. The original proposal is based…
Explainable AI (XAI) methods identify which features are relevant to a model's predictions but often fail to clarify why certain decisions are made. In this work, we present a novel method that integrates causality with argument-based…
Argumentative explainable AI has been advocated by several in recent years, with an increasing interest on explaining the reasoning outcomes of Argumentation Frameworks (AFs). While there is a considerable body of research on qualitatively…
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…
Judgmental forecasting is the task of making predictions about future events based on human judgment. This task can be seen as a form of claim verification, where the claim corresponds to a future event and the task is to assess the…
Judgmental forecasting employs human opinions to make predictions about future events, rather than exclusively historical data as in quantitative forecasting. When these opinions form an argumentative structure around forecasts, it is…
The recent Control Argumentation Framework (CAF) is a generalization of Dung's Argumentation Framework which handles argumentation dynamics under uncertainty; especially it can be used to model the behavior of an agent which can anticipate…
Causal models are playing an increasingly important role in machine learning, particularly in the realm of explainable AI. We introduce a conceptualisation for generating argumentation frameworks (AFs) from causal models for the purpose of…
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…
Argumentation is a central subarea of Artificial Intelligence (AI) for modeling and reasoning about arguments. The semantics of abstract argumentation frameworks (AFs) is given by sets of arguments (extensions) and conditions on the…
Probabilistic argumentation is an alternative to causal modeling with Bayesian networks. Probabilistic argumentation structures (PAS) are defined on families of compatible frames (f.c.f). This is a generalization of the usual multivariate…
Counterfactual explanations elucidate algorithmic decisions by pointing to scenarios that would have led to an alternative, desired outcome. Giving insight into the model's behavior, they hint users towards possible actions and give grounds…
This paper presents a formal approach to explaining change of inference in Quantitative Bipolar Argumentation Frameworks (QBAFs). When drawing conclusions from a QBAF and updating the QBAF to then again draw conclusions (and so on), our…
We introduce a novel method to aggregate Bipolar Argumentation (BA) Frameworks expressing opinions by different parties in debates. We use Bipolar Assumption-based Argumentation (ABA) as an all-encompassing formalism for BA under different…
Humans currently use arguments for explaining choices which are already made, or for evaluating potential choices. Each potential choice has usually pros and cons of various strengths. In spite of the usefulness of arguments in a decision…
Language models (LMs) trained on web-scale datasets are largely successful due to their ability to memorize large amounts of training data, even if only present in a few examples. These capabilities are often desirable in evaluation on…
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…
We consider multi-agent argumentation, where each agent's view of the arguments is encoded as an argumentation framework (AF). Then we study deliberative processes than can occur on this basis. We think of a deliberative process as taking…
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…