Abstract and Concrete Decision Graphs for Choosing Extensions of Argumentation Frameworks - Technical Report
English
Dauphin, Jérémie[University of Luxembourg > Faculty of Science, Technology and Communication (FSTC) > Computer Science and Communications Research Unit (CSC) >]
Cramer, Marcos[University of Luxembourg > Faculty of Science, Technology and Communication (FSTC) > Computer Science and Communications Research Unit (CSC) >]
van der Torre, Leon[University of Luxembourg > Faculty of Science, Technology and Communication (FSTC) > Computer Science and Communications Research Unit (CSC) >]
[en] Most argumentation semantics allow for multiple extensions, which raises the question of how to choose among extensions. We propose to study this question as a decision problem. Inspired by decision trees commonly used in economics, we introduce the notion of a decision graph for deciding between the multiple extensions of a given AF in a given semantics. We distinguish between abstract decision graphs and concrete instantiations thereof. Inspired by the principle-based approach to argumentation, we formulate two principles that mappings from argumentation frameworks to decision graphs should satisfy, the principle of decision-graph directionality and the one of directional decision-making. We then propose a concrete instantiation of decision graphs, which satisfies one of these principles. Finally, we discuss the potential for further research based on this novel methodology.