Related papers: Defense semantics of argumentation: revisit
In this paper we show how the defense relation among abstract arguments can be used to encode the reasons for accepting arguments. After introducing a novel notion of defenses and defense graphs, we propose a defense semantics together with…
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…
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…
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…
Dung's abstract argumentation theory is a widely used formalism to model conflicting information and to draw conclusions in such situations. Hereby, the knowledge is represented by so-called argumentation frameworks (AFs) and the reasoning…
One of the most prominent tools for abstract argumentation is the Dung's framework, AF for short. It is accompanied by a variety of semantics including grounded, complete, preferred and stable. Although powerful, AFs have their…
Dung's abstract argumentation frameworks model acceptability solely in terms of an attack relation, thereby conflating two conceptually distinct aspects of argumentative reasoning: direct conflict between arguments and the structural…
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…
In Dung's abstract argumentation, arguments are either acceptable or unacceptable, given a chosen notion of acceptability. This gives a coarse way to compare arguments. In this paper, we propose a counting approach for a more fine-gained…
Dung's Abstract Argumentation Framework (AF) has emerged as a key formalism for argumentation in Artificial Intelligence. It has been extended in several directions, including the possibility to express supports, leading to the development…
Cycles of attacking arguments pose non-trivial issues in Dung style argumentation theory, apparent behavioural difference between odd and even length cycles being a notable one. While a few methods were proposed for treating them, to - in…
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…
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 develops a new approach to computational argumentation that is informed by philosophical and linguistic views. Namely, it takes into account two ideas that have received little attention in the literature on computational…
Generalizing the attack structure in argumentation frameworks (AFs) has been studied in different ways. Most prominently, the binary attack relation of Dung frameworks has been extended to the notion of collective attacks. The resulting…
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…
Among the most general structures extending the framework by Dung are the abstract dialectical frameworks (ADFs). They come equipped with various types of semantics, with the most prominent - the labeling-based one - analyzed in the context…
In this paper we introduce a novel family of semantics called weakly complete semantics. Differently from Dung's complete semantics, weakly complete semantics employs a mechanism called undecidedness blocking by which the label undecided of…
We make three contributions. First, we formulate a discussion-graph semantics for first-order logic with equality, enabling reasoning about discussion and argumentation in AI more generally than before. This addresses the current lack of a…
Argumentation has proved a useful tool in defining formal semantics for assumption-based reasoning by viewing a proof as a process in which proponents and opponents attack each others arguments by undercuts (attack to an argument's premise)…