Preference in Abstract Argumentation

Abstract : Consider an argument A that is attacked by an argument B, while A is preferred to B. Existing approaches will either ignore the attack or reverse it. In this paper we introduce a new reduction of preference and attack to defeat, based on the idea that in such a case, instead of ignoring the attack, the preference is ignored. We compare this new reduction with the two existing ones using a principle-based approach, for the four Dung semantics. The principle-based or axiomatic approach is a methodology to choose an argumentation semantics for a particular application, and to guide the search for new argumentation semantics. For this analysis, we also introduce a fourth reduction, and a semantics for preference-based argumentation based on extension selection. Our classification of twenty alternatives for preference-based abstract argumentation semantics using six principles suggests that our new reduction has some advantages over the existing ones, in the sense that if the set of preferences increases, the sets of accepted arguments increase as well.
Document type :
Conference papers
Liste complète des métadonnées

https://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/hal-01876481
Contributor : Serena Villata <>
Submitted on : Tuesday, September 18, 2018 - 2:42:00 PM
Last modification on : Saturday, January 5, 2019 - 1:16:11 AM

Identifiers

Citation

Souhila Kaci, Leendert Van Der Torre, Serena Villata. Preference in Abstract Argumentation. COMMA 2018 - 7th International Conference on Computational Models of Argument, Sep 2018, Warsaw, Poland. pp.405-412, ⟨10.3233/978-1-61499-906-5-405⟩. ⟨hal-01876481⟩

Share

Metrics

Record views

96