Related papers: Abstract Weighted Based Gradual Semantics in Argum…
Gradual argumentation frameworks represent arguments and their relationships in a weighted graph. Their graphical structure and intuitive semantics makes them a potentially interesting tool for interpretable machine learning. It has been…
Abstract dialectical frameworks (ADFs) have been introduced as a formalism for modeling and evaluating argumentation allowing general logical satisfaction conditions. Different criteria used to settle the acceptance of arguments are called…
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…
Argumentation is a formalism allowing to reason with contradictory information by modeling arguments and their interactions. There are now an increasing number of gradual semantics and impact measures that have emerged to facilitate the…
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…
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…
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…
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…
We present a new and compelling approach to the efficient solution of important computational problems that arise in the context of abstract argumentation. Our approach makes known algorithms defined for restricted fragments generally…
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…
Weighted monadic second-order logic is a weighted extension of monadic second-order logic that captures exactly the behaviour of weighted automata. Its semantics is parameterized with respect to a semiring on which the values that weighted…
In this work, we broaden the investigation of admissibility notions in the context of assumption-based argumentation (ABA). More specifically, we study two prominent alternatives to the standard notion of admissibility from abstract…
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…
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…
Abstract argumentation provides us with methods such as gradual and Dung semantics with which to evaluate arguments after potential attacks by other arguments. Some of these methods can take intrinsic strengths of arguments as input, with…
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…
Weighted bipolar argumentation frameworks offer a tool for decision support and social media analysis. Arguments are evaluated by an iterative procedure that takes initial weights and attack and support relations into account. Until…
Abstract argumentation offers an appealing way of representing and evaluating arguments and counterarguments. This approach can be enhanced by a probability assignment to each argument. There are various interpretations that can be ascribed…
We show that context semantics can be fruitfully applied to the quantitative analysis of proof normalization in linear logic. In particular, context semantics lets us define the weight of a proof-net as a measure of its inherent complexity:…
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…