What Is a Reasonable Argumentation Semantics?

  title={What Is a Reasonable Argumentation Semantics?},
  author={S. A. Gaggl and Sebastian Rudolph and Micha{\"e}l Thomazo},
  booktitle={Advances in Knowledge Representation, Logic Programming, and Abstract Argumentation},
In view of the plethora of different argumentation semantics, we consider the question what the essential properties of a "reasonable" semantics are. We discuss three attempts of such a characterization, based on computational complexity, logical expressivity and invariance under partial duplication, which are satisfied by most, if not all, known semantics. We then challenge each of these proposals by exhibiting plausible semantics which still not satisfy our criteria, demonstrating the… 
Paracoherent Answer Set Semantics meets Argumentation Frameworks
This paper shows that another perspective is possible on incoherent AFs, called paracoherent extensions, as they have a counterpart inParacoherent answer set semantics, and compares this perspective with semi-stable and stage semantics, by showing that computational costs remain unchanged, and moreover an interesting symmetric behaviour is maintained.
ArgueApply: A Mobile App for Argumentation
ArgueApply is a mobile app for argumentation that is based on the Grappa framework, an extension of, e.g., abstract argumentation in the sense of Dung, where users can engage in online discussions and evaluate their semantics.


On principle-based evaluation of extension-based argumentation semantics
Proof Theories and Algorithms for Abstract Argumentation Frameworks
The main focus of this chapter is on more procedural, proof-theoretic and algorithmic aspects of argumentation, and properties of extensions of a Dung argumentation framework under various semantics.
Symmetric Argumentation Frameworks
This paper is centered on the family of Dung's finite argumentation frameworks when the attacks relation is symmetric (and nonempty and irreflexive). We show that while this family does not contain
Characterizing Strong Equivalence for Argumentation Frameworks
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.
On the evaluation of argumentation formalisms
Coherence in finite argument systems
Generalizations of Dung Frameworks and Their Role in Formal Argumentation
This article provides a short survey of some of the most popular abstract argumentation frameworks available today, highlighting the role of abstract frameworks in the argumentation process, and reviewing the original Dung frameworks and their semantics.
Repairing Preference-Based Argumentation Frameworks
The aim of the paper is to show that the three extensions of Dung framework may lead to unintended results, and to propose a new approach that takes into account the strengths of arguments, and that ensures sound results.
Abstract Argumentation via Monadic Second Order Logic
The results show that MSO can serve as a lingua franca for abstract argumentation that directly yields to complexity results and obtain that for argumentation frameworks with certain structural properties the main computational problems can all be solved in linear time.