Papers
Topics
Authors
Recent
Gemini 2.5 Flash
Gemini 2.5 Flash
169 tokens/sec
GPT-4o
7 tokens/sec
Gemini 2.5 Pro Pro
45 tokens/sec
o3 Pro
4 tokens/sec
GPT-4.1 Pro
38 tokens/sec
DeepSeek R1 via Azure Pro
28 tokens/sec
2000 character limit reached

Abstract Weighted Based Gradual Semantics in Argumentation Theory (2401.11472v3)

Published 21 Jan 2024 in cs.AI

Abstract: Weighted gradual semantics provide an acceptability degree to each argument representing the strength of the argument, computed based on factors including background evidence for the argument, and taking into account interactions between this argument and others. We introduce four important problems linking gradual semantics and acceptability degrees. First, we reexamine the inverse problem, seeking to identify the argument weights of the argumentation framework which lead to a specific final acceptability degree. Second, we ask whether the function mapping between argument weights and acceptability degrees is injective or a homeomorphism onto its image. Third, we ask whether argument weights can be found when preferences, rather than acceptability degrees for arguments are considered. Fourth, we consider the topology of the space of valid acceptability degrees, asking whether "gaps" exist in this space. While different gradual semantics have been proposed in the literature, in this paper, we identify a large family of weighted gradual semantics, called abstract weighted based gradual semantics. These generalise many of the existing semantics while maintaining desirable properties such as convergence to a unique fixed point. We also show that a sub-family of the weighted gradual semantics, called abstract weighted (Lp,\lambda,\mu)-based gradual semantics and which include well-known semantics, solve all four of the aforementioned problems.

Definition Search Book Streamline Icon: https://streamlinehq.com
References (24)
  1. Phan Minh Dung. On the Acceptability of Arguments and its Fundamental Role in Nonmonotonic Reasoning, Logic Programming and n-Person Games. Artif. Intell., 77(2):321–358, 1995.
  2. An introduction to argumentation semantics. Knowledge Eng. Review, 26(4):365–410, 2011.
  3. Bart Verheij. Two approaches to dialectical argumentation: admissible sets and argumentation stages. Proc. NAIC, 96:357–368, 1996.
  4. Martin Caminada. Semi-stable semantics. In Paul E. Dunne and Trevor J. M. Bench-Capon, editors, Computational Models of Argument: Proceedings of COMMA 2006, September 11-12, 2006, Liverpool, UK, volume 144 of Frontiers in Artificial Intelligence and Applications, pages 121–130. IOS Press, 2006.
  5. Computing ideal sceptical argumentation. Artif. Intell., 171(10-15):642–674, 2007.
  6. Ranking-Based Semantics for Argumentation Frameworks. In Proc. Scalable Uncertainty Management, pages 134–147, 2013.
  7. A Comparative Study of Ranking-Based Semantics for Abstract Argumentation. In Proc. AAAI, pages 914–920, 2016.
  8. An empirical and axiomatic comparison of ranking-based semantics for abstract argumentation. J. Appl. Non Class. Logics, 33(3-4):328–386, 2023.
  9. Ranking-based semantics for sets of attacking arguments. In Proceedings of the AAAI Conference on Artificial Intelligence, pages 3033–3040, June 2020.
  10. Gradual semantics for weighted graphs: An unifying approach. In Michael Thielscher, Francesca Toni, and Frank Wolter, editors, Principles of Knowledge Representation and Reasoning: Proceedings of the Sixteenth International Conference, KR 2018, Tempe, Arizona, 30 October - 2 November 2018, pages 613–614. AAAI Press, 2018.
  11. Gradual semantics for weighted bipolar setafs. In ECSQARU 2021, volume 12897 of Lecture Notes in Computer Science, pages 201–214. Springer, 2021.
  12. A logic-based theory of deductive arguments. Artif. Intell., 128(1-2):203–235, 2001.
  13. Evaluation of argument strength in attack graphs: Foundations and semantics. Artificial Intelligence, 302:103607, 2022.
  14. The inverse problem for argumentation gradual semantics. CoRR, abs/2202.00294, 2022.
  15. Argument Ranking with Categoriser Function. CoRR, abs/1406.3877, 2014.
  16. Realisability of rankings-based semantics. In Sarah Alice Gaggl, Jean-Guy Mailly, Matthias Thimm, and Johannes Peter Wallner, editors, Proceedings of the Fourth International Workshop on Systems and Algorithms for Formal Argumentation co-located with the 9th International Conference on Computational Models of Argument (COMMA 2022), Cardiff, Wales, United Kingdom, September 13, 2022, volume 3236 of CEUR Workshop Proceedings, pages 73–85. CEUR-WS.org, 2022.
  17. A bayesian approach to forward and inverse abstract argumentation problems. J. Appl. Non Class. Logics, 32(4):273–304, 2022.
  18. Inferring attack relations for gradual semantics. Argument & Computation, 14(3):327–345, 2023.
  19. Jean-Guy Mailly. A logical encoding for k-m-realization of extensions in abstract argumentation. In Andreas Herzig, Jieting Luo, and Pere Pardo, editors, Logic and Argumentation - 5th International Conference, CLAR 2023, Hangzhou, China, September 10-12, 2023, Proceedings, volume 14156 of Lecture Notes in Computer Science, pages 84–100. Springer, 2023.
  20. Selecting Extensions in Weighted Argumentation Frameworks. In Computational Models of Argument - Proceedings of COMMA 2012, Vienna, Austria, September 10-12, 2012, pages 342–349, 2012.
  21. Weighted attacks in argumentation frameworks. In Gerhard Brewka, Thomas Eiter, and Sheila A. McIlraith, editors, Principles of Knowledge Representation and Reasoning: Proceedings of the Thirteenth International Conference, KR 2012, Rome, Italy, June 10-14, 2012, pages 593–597. AAAI Press, 2012.
  22. Weighted argument systems: Basic definitions, algorithms, and complexity results. Artif. Intell., 175(2):457–486, 2011.
  23. Argument ranking with categoriser function. In Robert Buchmann, Claudiu Vasile Kifor, and Jian Yu, editors, Knowledge Science, Engineering and Management - 7th International Conference, KSEM 2014, Sibiu, Romania, October 16-18, 2014. Proceedings, volume 8793 of Lecture Notes in Computer Science, pages 290–301. Springer, 2014.
  24. On bipolarity in argumentation frameworks. Int. J. Intell. Syst., 23(10):1062–1093, 2008.

Summary

We haven't generated a summary for this paper yet.