2010Frontiers in artificial intelligence and applicationsRequires access

Refined Preference-based Argumentation Frameworks

Kaci Souhila

Open publisher page 14 citations

Abstract

Argumentation is a reasoning model based on constructing arguments, determining potential conflicts between arguments and determining acceptable arguments. Dung's argumentation theory is an abstract framework based on a binary defeat relation between arguments. Due to this abstract representation, it has been instantiated in different ways. In particular, preference-based argumentation frameworks take into account a preference relation over arguments together with a (non necessarily symmetric) attack relation. We show that preference-based argumentation frameworks faithfully instantiate Dung's framework only when the attack relation is symmetric. Moreover the latter condition prevents undesirable results. We also promote a higher impact of preferences in preference-based argumentation frameworks and propose different ways to rank-order sets of acceptable arguments.

About this research paper

What this paper is about

Argumentation is a reasoning model based on constructing arguments, determining potential conflicts between arguments and determining acceptable arguments. Dung's argumentation theory is an abstract framework based on a binary defeat relation between arguments. Due to this abstract representation, it has been instantiated in different ways. In particular, preference-based argumentation frameworks take into account a preference relation over arguments together with a (non necessarily symmetric) attack relation. We show that preference-based argumentation frameworks faithfully instantiate Dung's framework only when the attack relation is symmetric. Moreover the latter condition prevents undesirable results. We also promote a higher impact of preferences in preference-based argumentation frameworks and propose different ways to rank-order sets of acceptable arguments.

Why it matters

OpenAlex reports 14 citations for this work. Citation counts describe recorded attention and do not establish research quality.

Key contribution

A contribution statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.

Method / approach

Method details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Main findings

Findings are not separately available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Limitations

Limitations are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Applications

Application details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Available abstract

Argumentation is a reasoning model based on constructing arguments, determining potential conflicts between arguments and determining acceptable arguments. Dung's argumentation theory is an abstract framework based on a binary defeat relation between arguments. Due to this abstract representation, it has been instantiated in different ways. In particular, preference-based argumentation frameworks take into account a preference relation over arguments together with a (non necessarily symmetric) attack relation. We show that preference-based argumentation frameworks faithfully instantiate Dung's framework only when the attack relation is symmetric. Moreover the latter condition prevents undesirable results. We also promote a higher impact of preferences in preference-based argumentation frameworks and propose different ways to rank-order sets of acceptable arguments.

Key concepts: Argumentation theory, Preference, Computer science, Psychology, Epistemology, Mathematics, Philosophy, Statistics

Related papers

Back to paper searchBrowse research topicsOriginal source
Refined Preference-based Argumentation Frameworks — Research Paper | ScholarLens