An Extension-Based Argument-Ranking Semantics: Social Rankings in Abstract Argumentation Long Version

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2412.13632v1
• Date: Wed, 18 Dec 2024 09:08:46 GMT
• Title: An Extension-Based Argument-Ranking Semantics: Social Rankings in Abstract Argumentation Long Version
• Authors: Lars Bengel, Giovanni Buraglio, Jan Maly, Kenneth Skiba,
• Abstract summary: We introduce a new family of argument-ranking semantics which can be seen as a refinement of the classification of arguments into skeptically accepted, credulously accepted and rejected. We use so-called social ranking functions which have been developed recently to rank individuals based on their performance in groups.
• Score: 10.77710090438138
• License:
• Abstract: In this paper, we introduce a new family of argument-ranking semantics which can be seen as a refinement of the classification of arguments into skeptically accepted, credulously accepted and rejected. To this end we use so-called social ranking functions which have been developed recently to rank individuals based on their performance in groups. We provide necessary and sufficient conditions for a social ranking function to give rise to an argument-ranking semantics satisfying the desired refinement property.

Related papers

• Overview of PerpectiveArg2024: The First Shared Task on Perspective Argument Retrieval [56.66761232081188]
  We present a novel dataset covering demographic and socio-cultural (socio) variables, such as age, gender, and political attitude, representing minority and majority groups in society. We find substantial challenges in incorporating perspectivism, especially when aiming for personalization based solely on the text of arguments without explicitly providing socio profiles. While we bootstrap perspective argument retrieval, further research is essential to optimize retrieval systems to facilitate personalization and reduce polarization.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-07-29T03:14:57Z)
• Hierarchical Indexing for Retrieval-Augmented Opinion Summarization [60.5923941324953]
  We propose a method for unsupervised abstractive opinion summarization that combines the attributability and scalability of extractive approaches with the coherence and fluency of Large Language Models (LLMs) Our method, HIRO, learns an index structure that maps sentences to a path through a semantically organized discrete hierarchy. At inference time, we populate the index and use it to identify and retrieve clusters of sentences containing popular opinions from input reviews.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-03-01T10:38:07Z)
• CASA: Causality-driven Argument Sufficiency Assessment [79.13496878681309]
  We propose CASA, a zero-shot causality-driven argument sufficiency assessment framework. PS measures how likely introducing the premise event would lead to the conclusion when both the premise and conclusion events are absent. Experiments on two logical fallacy detection datasets demonstrate that CASA accurately identifies insufficient arguments.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-01-10T16:21:18Z)
• 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)
• Ranking-based Argumentation Semantics Applied to Logical Argumentation (full version) [2.9005223064604078]
  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.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-07-31T15:44:33Z)
• Reward Collapse in Aligning Large Language Models [64.98482888193267]
  We study the phenomenon of textitreward collapse', an empirical observation where the prevailing ranking-based approach results in an textitidentical reward distribution. Our experimental results suggest that our proposed prompt-aware utility functions significantly alleviate reward collapse during the training of reward models.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-05-28T02:12:00Z)
• 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)
• Fuzzy Labeling Semantics for Quantitative Argumentation [0.0]
  We provide a novel quantitative method called fuzzy labeling for fuzzy argumentation systems. A triple of acceptability, rejectability, and undecidability degrees is used to evaluate argument strength.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-07-15T08:31:36Z)
• 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)
• Rationale-Augmented Ensembles in Language Models [53.45015291520658]
  We reconsider rationale-augmented prompting for few-shot in-context learning. We identify rationale sampling in the output space as the key component to robustly improve performance. We demonstrate that rationale-augmented ensembles achieve more accurate and interpretable results than existing prompting approaches.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-07-02T06:20:57Z)
• Towards Ranking-based Semantics for Abstract Argumentation using Conditional Logic Semantics [8.619759570837951]
  We propose a novel ranking-based semantics for Dung-style argumentation frameworks. Using an intuitive translation for an argumentation framework to generate conditionals, we can apply nonmonotonic inference systems to generate a ranking on possible worlds.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2020-08-05T08:34:16Z)

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.