Aggregative Semantics for Quantitative Bipolar Argumentation Frameworks

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2603.06067v1
• Date: Fri, 06 Mar 2026 09:22:55 GMT
• Title: Aggregative Semantics for Quantitative Bipolar Argumentation Frameworks
• Abstract summary: We introduce a novel family of gradual semantics, called aggregative semantics.<n>In order to deal with situations in which attackers and supporters do not play a symmetric role, we propose to aggregate attackers and supporters separately.<n>This leads to a three-stage computation, which consists in computing a global weight for attackers and another for supporters.
• Score: 2.9722048871879636
• License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/4.0/
• 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 depending on a chosen semantics. This paper deals with the specific context of Quantitative Bipolar Argumentation Frameworks (QBAF), where arguments have intrinsic weights and can attack or support each other. In this context, we introduce a novel family of gradual semantics, called aggregative semantics. In order to deal with situations in which attackers and supporters do not play a symmetric role, and in contrast to modular semantics, we propose to aggregate attackers and supporters separately. This leads to a three-stage computation, which consists in computing a global weight for attackers and another for supporters, before aggregating these two values with the intrinsic weight of the argument. We discuss the properties that the three aggregation functions should satisfy depending on the context, as well as their relationships with the classical principles for gradual semantics. This discussion is supported by various simple examples, as well as a final example on which five hundred aggregative semantics are tested and compared, illustrating the range of possible behaviours with aggregative semantics. Decomposing the computation into three distinct and interpretable steps leads to a more parametrisable computation: it keeps the bipolarity one step further than what is done in the literature, and it leads to more understandable gradual semantics.

Related papers

• Semantic Field Theory: Historical Origin, Higher-Order Interaction, and Stabilized Semantic Inference [0.0]
  This paper contributes five formal elements to Semantic Field Theory (SFT)<n>First, it defines a semantic field model as a consisting of a semantic space, a lexical field lifting, a contextual deformation map, an interaction complex, and an interpretation functional.<n>Third, it generalizes the three-word problem by using Mobius inversion on the subset lattice to isolate irreducible semantic interactions of arbitrary order.<n>Fourth, it introduces an order spectrum that measures how much field mass is explained at each interaction order.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-05-14T13:10:06Z)
• AffordGrasp: Cross-Modal Diffusion for Affordance-Aware Grasp Synthesis [50.793806818677716]
  AffordGrasp produces physically stable and semantically faithful human grasps with high precision.<n>AffordGrasp integrates an affordance-aware latent representation of hand poses with a dual-conditioning diffusion process.<n>We evaluate AffordGrasp across four instruction-augmented benchmarks derived from HO-3D, OakInk, GRAB, and AffordPose.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-03-09T06:56:35Z)
• Rejecting Arguments Based on Doubt in Structured Bipolar Argumentation [2.6754173570117303]
  This paper develops a new approach to computational argumentation informed by philosophical and linguistic views.<n>It takes into account two ideas that have received little attention in the literature on computational argumentation.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-02-03T09:09:19Z)
• On Gradual Semantics for Assumption-Based Argumentation [15.021229450879316]
  In computational argumentation, gradual semantics are fine-grained alternatives to extension-based and labelling-based semantics.<n>We show that our gradual ABA semantics satisfy suitable adaptations of desirable properties, such as balance and monotonicity.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-07-14T09:02:45Z)
• How do Transformers Learn Implicit Reasoning? [67.02072851088637]
  We study how implicit multi-hop reasoning emerges by training transformers from scratch in a controlled symbolic environment.<n>We find that training with atomic triples is not necessary but accelerates learning, and that second-hop generalization relies on query-level exposure to specific compositional structures.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-05-29T17:02:49Z)
• Abstract Weighted Based Gradual Semantics in Argumentation Theory [3.2566808526538873]
  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. 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.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-01-21T12:22:48Z)
• Agentivit\`a e telicit\`a in GilBERTo: implicazioni cognitive [77.71680953280436]
  The goal of this study is to investigate whether a Transformer-based neural language model infers lexical semantics. The semantic properties considered are telicity (also combined with definiteness) and agentivity.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-07-06T10:52:22Z)
• Syntax and Semantics Meet in the "Middle": Probing the Syntax-Semantics Interface of LMs Through Agentivity [68.8204255655161]
  We present the semantic notion of agentivity as a case study for probing such interactions. This suggests LMs may potentially serve as more useful tools for linguistic annotation, theory testing, and discovery.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-05-29T16:24:01Z)
• Evaluating the Robustness of Interpretability Methods through Explanation Invariance and Equivariance [72.50214227616728]
  Interpretability methods are valuable only if their explanations faithfully describe the explained model. We consider neural networks whose predictions are invariant under a specific symmetry group.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-04-13T17:59:03Z)
• 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)
• Human Correspondence Consensus for 3D Object Semantic Understanding [56.34297279246823]
  In this paper, we introduce a new dataset named CorresPondenceNet. Based on this dataset, we are able to learn dense semantic embeddings with a novel geodesic consistency loss. We show that CorresPondenceNet could not only boost fine-grained understanding of heterogeneous objects but also cross-object registration and partial object matching.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2019-12-29T04:24:22Z)

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.