• Corpus ID: 221725400

Explaining PageRank through Argumentation

  title={Explaining PageRank through Argumentation},
  author={Emanuele Albini},
In this paper we show how re-interpreting PageRank as an argumentation semantics for a bipolar argumentation framework empowers its explainability. To this purpose we propose several types of explanation, each of which focuses on different aspects of the algorithm and uncovers information useful for the comprehension of its results. 

Figures from this paper



PageRank beyond the Web

Google's PageRank method is now regularly used in bibliometrics, social and information network analysis, and for link prediction and recommendation, and it's even used for systems analysis of road networks.

From fine-grained properties to broad principles for gradual argumentation: A principled spectrum

The PageRank Citation Ranking : Bringing Order to the Web

This paper describes PageRank, a mathod for rating Web pages objectively and mechanically, effectively measuring the human interest and attention devoted to them, and shows how to efficiently compute PageRank for large numbers of pages.

Graduality in Argumentation

The purpose is to introduce "graduality" in the selection of the best arguments, i.e. to be able to partition the set of the arguments in more than the two usual subsets of "selected" and "non-selected" arguments in order to represent different levels of selection.

Explaining Explanations in AI

This work contrasts the different schools of thought on what makes an explanation in philosophy and sociology, and suggests that machine learning might benefit from viewing the problem more broadly.

PageRank as an Argumentation Semantics

An introduction to argumentation semantics

The paper presents an extensive set of general properties for semantics evaluation and analyzes the notions of argument justification and skepticism, and discusses some relationships between semantics properties and domain-specific requirements.

Cayrol and M . - C . Lagasquie - Schiex . Graduality in Argumentation

  • J . of Artificial Intelligence Research
  • 2005