Preservation of Semantic Properties during the Aggregation of Abstract Argumentation Frameworks

@inproceedings{Chen2017PreservationOS,
  title={Preservation of Semantic Properties during the Aggregation of Abstract Argumentation Frameworks},
  author={Weiwei Chen and Ulrich Endriss},
  booktitle={Theoretical Aspects of Rationality and Knowledge},
  year={2017}
}
An abstract argumentation framework can be used to model the argumentative stance of an agent at a high level of abstraction, by indicating for every pair of arguments that is being considered in a debate whether the first attacks the second. When modelling a group of agents engaged in a debate, we may wish to aggregate their individual argumentation frameworks to obtain a single such framework that reflects the consensus of the group. Even when agents disagree on many details, there may well… 

Figures from this paper

Aggregating Alternative Extensions of Abstract Argumentation Frameworks: Preservation Results for Quota Rules

It is shown that, while for some properties there are quota rules that guarantee their preservation, for the more demanding properties it is impossible to do so in general.

Aggregation of Support-Relations of Bipolar Argumentation Frameworks

Using the methodology in social choice theory, this paper analyzes what semantic properties of bipolar argumentation frameworks can be preserved by desirable aggregation rules during aggregation of support-relations.

Preventing Manipulation in Aggregating Value-Based Argumentation Frameworks

Recently, connections between abstract argumentation and decision making have gained increasing attention. In particular, value-based argumentation attempts to capture the specificity of deliberation

Aggregating Bipolar Opinions

We introduce a novel method to aggregate Bipolar Argumentation (BA) Frameworks expressing opinions by different parties in debates. We use Bipolar Assumption-based Argumentation (ABA) as an

Graph Aggregation

A recently introduced formal framework for graph aggregation that is grounded in social choice theory is reviewed, with a main result a powerful impossibility theorem that generalises Arrow's seminal result regarding the aggregation of preference orders to a large collection of different types of graphs.

Aggregating Bipolar Opinions (With Appendix)

We introduce a novel method to aggregate Bipolar Argumentation (BA) Frameworks expressing opinions by different parties in debates. We use Bipolar Assumption-based Argumentation (ABA) as an

3rd Summer School on Argumentation: Computational and Linguistic Perspectives

s 15 Weiwei Chen Aggregation of Argumentative Stances . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15 Rory Duthie Recognising Ethos in Natural Language . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17

Open Archive Toulouse Archive Ouverte

It is argued that quantitative methods can be used to distinguish different classes of polysemous nouns in the language on the basis of the variability of copredication contexts.

A Social Choice Theoretic Perspective on Database Aggregation

Social welfare functions, the cornerstone problem in social choice theory, can be viewed as mechanisms to merge conflicting information, namely the individual preferences of voters expressed in the form of linear orders over a set of alternatives.

References

SHOWING 1-10 OF 27 REFERENCES

Rationalisation of Profiles of Abstract Argumentation Frameworks

This work treats the question of rationalisability of a profile as an algorithmic problem and identifies tractable and intractable cases for what types of profiles can reasonably be expected to come up in a multiagent system.

Collective argument evaluation as judgement aggregation

This paper extensively analyse an argument-wise plurality voting rule, showing that it suffers a fundamental limitation and demonstrating, through a general impossibility result, that this limitation is more fundamentally rooted.

Argumentation in Artificial Intelligence

This book presents an overview of key concepts in argumentation theory and of formal models of argumentation in AI, beginning with a review of the foundational issues in argueation and formal argument modeling, and moving to more specialized topics, such as algorithmic issues, argumentations in multi-agent systems, and strategic aspects of argumentations.

On judgment aggregation in abstract argumentation

It is claimed that collective irrationality should not be the only worry of judgment aggregation, and three aggregation operators that satisfy the condition above are introduced, and two definitions of compatibility are offered.

Elements of Argumentation

The need to take intrinsic and extrinsic factors into account is considered, and ways that this can be done in logic in order to refine existing logic-based approaches to argumentation are considered.

Aggregation of Attack Relations: A Social-Choice Theoretical Analysis of Defeasibility Criteria

This paper analyzes the aggregation of different abstract attack relations over a common set of arguments. Each of those attack relations can be considered as the representation of a criterion of