A Methodology for Gradual Semantics for Structured Argumentation under Incomplete Information

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2410.22209v1
• Date: Tue, 29 Oct 2024 16:38:35 GMT
• Title: A Methodology for Gradual Semantics for Structured Argumentation under Incomplete Information
• Authors: Antonio Rago, Stylianos Loukas Vasileiou, Francesca Toni, Tran Cao Son, William Yeoh,
• Abstract summary: 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.
• Score: 15.717458041314194
• License:
• Abstract: Gradual semantics have demonstrated great potential in argumentation, in particular for deploying quantitative bipolar argumentation frameworks (QBAFs) in a number of real-world settings, from judgmental forecasting to explainable AI. In this paper, we provide a novel methodology for obtaining gradual semantics for structured argumentation frameworks, where the building blocks of arguments and relations between them are known, unlike in QBAFs, where arguments are abstract entities. Differently from existing approaches, our methodology accommodates incomplete information about arguments' premises. We demonstrate the potential of our approach by introducing two different instantiations of the methodology, leveraging existing gradual semantics for QBAFs in these more complex frameworks. We also define a set of novel properties for gradual semantics in structured argumentation, discuss their suitability over a set of existing properties. Finally, we provide a comprehensive theoretical analysis assessing the instantiations, demonstrating the their advantages over existing gradual semantics for QBAFs and structured argumentation.

Related papers

• Explaining Datasets in Words: Statistical Models with Natural Language Parameters [66.69456696878842]
  We introduce a family of statistical models -- including clustering, time series, and classification models -- parameterized by natural language predicates. We apply our framework to a wide range of problems: taxonomizing user chat dialogues, characterizing how they evolve across time, finding categories where one language model is better than the other.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-09-13T01:40:20Z)
• Contextualization Distillation from Large Language Model for Knowledge Graph Completion [51.126166442122546]
  We introduce the Contextualization Distillation strategy, a plug-in-and-play approach compatible with both discriminative and generative KGC frameworks. Our method begins by instructing large language models to transform compact, structural triplets into context-rich segments. Comprehensive evaluations across diverse datasets and KGC techniques highlight the efficacy and adaptability of our approach.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-01-28T08:56:49Z)
• "You Are An Expert Linguistic Annotator": Limits of LLMs as Analyzers of Abstract Meaning Representation [60.863629647985526]
  We examine the successes and limitations of the GPT-3, ChatGPT, and GPT-4 models in analysis of sentence meaning structure. We find that models can reliably reproduce the basic format of AMR, and can often capture core event, argument, and modifier structure. Overall, our findings indicate that these models out-of-the-box can capture aspects of semantic structure, but there remain key limitations in their ability to support fully accurate semantic analyses or parses.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-10-26T21:47:59Z)
• Context-aware feature attribution through argumentation [0.0]
  We define a novel feature attribution framework called Context-Aware Feature Attribution Through Argumentation (CA-FATA) Our framework harnesses the power of argumentation by treating each feature as an argument that can either support, attack or neutralize a prediction.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-10-24T20:02:02Z)
• 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)
• Towards Feasible Counterfactual Explanations: A Taxonomy Guided Template-based NLG Method [0.5003525838309206]
  Counterfactual Explanations (cf-XAI) describe the smallest changes in feature values necessary to change an outcome from one class to another. Many cf-XAI methods neglect the feasibility of those changes. We introduce a novel approach for presenting cf-XAI in natural language (Natural-XAI)
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-10-03T12:48:57Z)
• MURMUR: Modular Multi-Step Reasoning for Semi-Structured Data-to-Text Generation [102.20036684996248]
  We propose MURMUR, a neuro-symbolic modular approach to text generation from semi-structured data with multi-step reasoning. We conduct experiments on two data-to-text generation tasks like WebNLG and LogicNLG.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-12-16T17:36:23Z)
• Can Unsupervised Knowledge Transfer from Social Discussions Help Argument Mining? [25.43442712037725]
  We propose a novel transfer learning strategy to overcome the challenges of unsupervised, argumentative discourse-aware knowledge. We utilize argumentation-rich social discussions from the ChangeMyView subreddit as a source of unsupervised, argumentative discourse-aware knowledge. We introduce a novel prompt-based strategy for inter-component relation prediction that compliments our proposed finetuning method.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-03-24T06:48:56Z)
• AGM Belief Revision, Semantically [1.7403133838762446]
  We establish a generic, model-theoretic characterization of belief revision operators implementing the paradigm of minimal change. Our characterization applies to all Tarskian logics, that is, all logics with a classical model-theoretic semantics.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2021-12-27T07:53:21Z)
• DeepA2: A Modular Framework for Deep Argument Analysis with Pretrained Neural Text2Text Language Models [7.132217701156598]
  We present and implement a multi-dimensional, modular framework for performing deep argument analysis (DeepA2) using current pre-trained language models (PTLMs) We create a synthetic corpus for deep argument analysis, and evaluate ArgumentAnalyst on this new dataset and on existing data, specifically EntailmentBank. Our empirical findings vindicate the overall framework and highlight the advantages of a modular design.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2021-10-04T15:24:07Z)
• Infusing Finetuning with Semantic Dependencies [62.37697048781823]
  We show that, unlike syntax, semantics is not brought to the surface by today's pretrained models. We then use convolutional graph encoders to explicitly incorporate semantic parses into task-specific finetuning.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2020-12-10T01:27:24Z)

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.