Inferring Attack Relations for Gradual Semantics

  title={Inferring Attack Relations for Gradual Semantics},
  author={N. Oren and Bruno Yun},
A gradual semantics takes a weighted argumentation framework as input and outputs a final acceptability degree for each argument, with different semantics performing the computation in different manners. In this work, we consider the problem of attack inference. That is, given a gradual semantics, a set of arguments with associated initial weights, and the final desirable acceptability degrees associated with each argument, we seek to determine whether there is a set of attacks on those… 

Figures and Tables from this paper



Inverse Problems for Gradual Semantics

An algorithm to answer the inverse problem over weighted semantics, a characterisation of the properties that a gradual semantics must satisfy for the algorithm to operate, and an empirical evaluation of the proposed algorithm are considered.

Analytical Solutions for the Inverse Problem within Gradual Semantics

This paper demonstrates that for a class of gradual semantics, an analytical approach can be used to solve the inverse problem, and proves several important properties which previous work had posed as conjectures.

Rich preference-based argumentation frameworks

Modular Semantics and Characteristics for Bipolar Weighted Argumentation Graphs

It is shown that the various semantics for bipolar argumentation graphs from the literature may be analysed as a composition of an aggregation function with an influence function, and it is demonstrated that all well-behaved modular acceptability semantics converge for all acyclic graphs and that no sum-based semantics can convergence for all graphs.

Empirical evaluation of abstract argumentation: Supporting the need for bipolar and probabilistic approaches

Characterizing Realizability in Abstract Argumentation

A general framework for analyzing realizability in abstract dialectical frameworks (ADFs) and various of its subclasses is introduced and a uniform characterization method for the admissible, complete, preferred and model/stable semantics is presented.

Ranking-Based Semantics for Argumentation Frameworks

A new family of semantics which rank-orders arguments from the most acceptable to the weakest one(s) is proposed, and a set of rational postulates that such semantics could satisfy are proposed.

A Comparative Study of Ranking-Based Semantics for Abstract Argumentation

A general comparison of all these ranking-based semantics with respect to the proposed proper- ties is provided, to underline the differences of behavior between the existing semantics.

AGM Meets Abstract Argumentation: Expansion and Revision for Dung Frameworks

This paper shows how AGM-style expansion and revision operators can be defined for Dung's abstract argumentation frameworks (AFs), based on a reformulation of the original AGM postulates for revision in terms of monotonic consequence relations for AFs.