Ranking-based Argumentation Semantics Applied to Logical Argumentation (full version)

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2307.16780v1
• Date: Mon, 31 Jul 2023 15:44:33 GMT
• Title: Ranking-based Argumentation Semantics Applied to Logical Argumentation (full version)
• Authors: Jesse Heyninck and Badran Raddaoui and Christian Stra{\ss}er
• Abstract summary: We investigate the behaviour of ranking-based semantics for structured argumentation. We show that a wide class of ranking-based semantics gives rise to so-called culpability measures.
• Score: 2.9005223064604078
• License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
• Abstract: In formal argumentation, a distinction can be made between extension-based semantics, where sets of arguments are either (jointly) accepted or not, and ranking-based semantics, where grades of acceptability are assigned to arguments. Another important distinction is that between abstract approaches, that abstract away from the content of arguments, and structured approaches, that specify a method of constructing argument graphs on the basis of a knowledge base. While ranking-based semantics have been extensively applied to abstract argumentation, few work has been done on ranking-based semantics for structured argumentation. In this paper, we make a systematic investigation into the behaviour of ranking-based semantics applied to existing formalisms for structured argumentation. We show that a wide class of ranking-based semantics gives rise to so-called culpability measures, and are relatively robust to specific choices in argument construction methods.

Related papers

• A Methodology for Gradual Semantics for Structured Argumentation under Incomplete Information [15.717458041314194]
  We provide a novel methodology for obtaining gradual semantics for structured argumentation frameworks. Our methodology accommodates incomplete information about arguments' premises. We demonstrate the potential of our approach by introducing two different instantiations of the methodology.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-10-29T16:38:35Z)
• An Encoding of Abstract Dialectical Frameworks into Higher-Order Logic [57.24311218570012]
  This approach allows for the computer-assisted analysis of abstract dialectical frameworks. Exemplary applications include the formal analysis and verification of meta-theoretical properties.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-12-08T09:32:26Z)
• A Unifying Framework for Learning Argumentation Semantics [50.69905074548764]
  We present a novel framework, which uses an Inductive Logic Programming approach to learn the acceptability semantics for several abstract and structured argumentation frameworks in an interpretable way. Our framework outperforms existing argumentation solvers, thus opening up new future research directions in the area of formal argumentation and human-machine dialogues.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-10-18T20:18:05Z)
• Unsupervised Mapping of Arguments of Deverbal Nouns to Their Corresponding Verbal Labels [52.940886615390106]
  Deverbal nouns are verbs commonly used in written English texts to describe events or actions, as well as their arguments. The solutions that do exist for handling arguments of nominalized constructions are based on semantic annotation. We propose to adopt a more syntactic approach, which maps the arguments of deverbal nouns to the corresponding verbal construction.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-06-24T10:07:01Z)
• Many-valued Argumentation, Conditionals and a Probabilistic Semantics for Gradual Argumentation [3.9571744700171743]
  We propose a general approach to define a many-valued preferential interpretation of gradual argumentation semantics. As a proof of concept, in the finitely-valued case, an Answer set Programming approach is proposed for conditional reasoning. The paper also develops and discusses a probabilistic semantics for gradual argumentation, which builds on the many-valued conditional semantics.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-12-14T22:10:46Z)
• Admissibility in Strength-based Argumentation: Complexity and Algorithms (Extended Version with Proofs) [1.5828697880068698]
  We study the adaptation of admissibility-based semantics to Strength-based Argumentation Frameworks (StrAFs) Especially, we show that the strong admissibility defined in the literature does not satisfy a desirable property, namely Dung's fundamental lemma. We propose a translation in pseudo-Boolean constraints for computing (strong and weak) extensions.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-07-05T18:42:04Z)
• The Inverse Problem for Argumentation Gradual Semantics [8.860629791560198]
  A sub-class of such semantics, the so-called weighted semantics, takes an initial set of weights over the arguments as input. We consider the inverse problem over such weighted semantics. That is, given an argumentation framework and a desired argument ranking, we ask whether there exist initial weights such that a particular semantics produces the given ranking.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-02-01T09:46:23Z)
• A Formalisation of Abstract Argumentation in Higher-Order Logic [77.34726150561087]
  We present an approach for representing abstract argumentation frameworks based on an encoding into classical higher-order logic. This provides a uniform framework for computer-assisted assessment of abstract argumentation frameworks using interactive and automated reasoning tools.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2021-10-18T10:45:59Z)
• Exploring Discourse Structures for Argument Impact Classification [48.909640432326654]
  This paper empirically shows that the discourse relations between two arguments along the context path are essential factors for identifying the persuasive power of an argument. We propose DisCOC to inject and fuse the sentence-level structural information with contextualized features derived from large-scale language models.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2021-06-02T06:49:19Z)
• High-order Semantic Role Labeling [86.29371274587146]
  This paper introduces a high-order graph structure for the neural semantic role labeling model. It enables the model to explicitly consider not only the isolated predicate-argument pairs but also the interaction between the predicate-argument pairs. Experimental results on 7 languages of the CoNLL-2009 benchmark show that the high-order structural learning techniques are beneficial to the strong performing SRL models.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2020-10-09T15:33:54Z)

This list is automatically generated from the titles and abstracts of the papers in this site.

This site does not guarantee the quality of this site (including all information) and is not responsible for any consequences.