A Comparative Study of Ranking-based Semantics for Abstract Argumentation

Abstract : Argumentation is a process of evaluating and comparing a set of arguments. A way to compare them consists in using a ranking-based semantics which rank-order arguments from the most to the least acceptable ones. Recently, a number of such semantics have been proposed independently, often associated with some desirable properties. However, there is no comparative study which takes a broader perspective. This is what we propose in this work. We provide a general comparison of all these semantics with respect to the proposed properties. That allows to underline the differences of behavior between the existing semantics.
Document type :
Conference papers
Complete list of metadatas

Cited literature [10 references]  Display  Hide  Download

https://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/hal-01263996
Contributor : Nicolas Maudet <>
Submitted on : Friday, January 29, 2016 - 4:49:21 PM
Last modification on : Tuesday, December 3, 2019 - 7:48:09 PM
Long-term archiving on : Friday, November 11, 2016 - 6:35:06 PM

Files

BDKMAAAI16.pdf
Publisher files allowed on an open archive

Identifiers

  • HAL Id : hal-01263996, version 1
  • ARXIV : 1602.01059

Citation

Elise Bonzon, Jérôme Delobelle, Sébastien Konieczny, Nicolas Maudet. A Comparative Study of Ranking-based Semantics for Abstract Argumentation. 30th AAAI Conference on Artificial Intelligence (AAAI-2016), Feb 2016, Phoenix, United States. ⟨hal-01263996⟩

Share

Metrics

Record views

284

Files downloads

221