Related papers: Weighted Assumption Based Argumentation to reason …
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…
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…
Causal discovery seeks to uncover causal relations from data, typically represented as causal graphs, and is essential for predicting the effects of interventions. While expert knowledge is required to construct principled causal graphs,…
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…
In the context of abstract argumentation, we present the benefits of considering temporality, i.e. the order in which arguments are enunciated, as well as causality. We propose a formal method to rewrite the concepts of acyclic abstract…
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…
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…
Argumentation provides a representation of arguments and attacks between these arguments. Argumentation can be used to represent a reasoning process over evidence to reach conclusions. Within such a reasoning process, understanding the…
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…
An extension of an abstract argumentation framework, called collective argumentation, is introduced in which the attack relation is defined directly among sets of arguments. The extension turns out to be suitable, in particular, for…
This article offers several contributions to the interdisciplinary project of responsible research and innovation in data science and AI. First, it provides a critical analysis of current efforts to establish practical mechanisms for…
Weighted knowledge bases for description logics with typicality have been recently considered under a "concept-wise" multipreference semantics (in both the two-valued and fuzzy case), as the basis of a logical semantics of Multilayer…
The power of multiple testing procedures can be increased by using weighted p-values (Genovese, Roeder and Wasserman 2005). We derive the optimal weights and we show that the power is remarkably robust to misspecification of these weights.…
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…
It is widely acknowledged that transparency of automated decision making is crucial for deployability of intelligent systems, and explaining the reasons why some decisions are "good" and some are not is a way to achieving this transparency.…
We introduce a weight assignment logic for reasoning about quantitative languages of infinite words. This logic is an extension of the classical MSO logic and permits to describe quantitative properties of systems with multiple weight…
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…
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…
This paper combines two studies: a topological semantics for epistemic notions and abstract argumentation theory. In our combined setting, we use a topological semantics to represent the structure of an agent's collection of evidence, and…
An argument can be seen as a pair consisting of a set of premises and a claim supported by them. Arguments used by humans are often enthymemes, i.e., some premises are implicit. To better understand, evaluate, and compare enthymemes, it is…