[en] Baumann, Brewka and Ulbricht recently introduced weak admissibility as an alternative to Dung’s notion of admissibility, and they used it to define weakly preferred, weakly complete and weakly grounded semantics of argumentation frameworks. In earlier work, we introduced two variants of their new semantics which we called qualified and semi-qualified semantics. We analysed all known variants of weak admissibility semantics with respect to some of the principles discussed in the literature on abstract argumentation, as well as some new principles we introduced to distinguish them all. Such a principle-based analysis can be used not only for selecting a semantics for an application, or for algorithmic design, but also for further research into weak admissibility semantics. In this paper, we introduce six new kinds of semantics based on weak admissibility, and we provide an initial principle-based analysis. The analysis illustrates various ways in which the new semantics improve on existing ones.
Disciplines :
Sciences informatiques
Auteur, co-auteur :
DAUPHIN, Jérémie ; University of Luxembourg > Faculty of Science, Technology and Medicine (FSTM) > Department of Computer Science (DCS)
Rienstra, Tjitze
VAN DER TORRE, Leon ; University of Luxembourg > Faculty of Science, Technology and Medicine (FSTM) > Department of Computer Science (DCS)
Co-auteurs externes :
yes
Langue du document :
Anglais
Titre :
New Weak Admissibility Semantics for Abstract Argumentation
Date de publication/diffusion :
2021
Nom de la manifestation :
4th International Conference on Logic and Argumentation (CLAR 2021)
Organisateur de la manifestation :
Springer
Date de la manifestation :
October 20, 2021 to October 22, 2021
Titre de l'ouvrage principal :
International Conference on Logic and Argumentation
Baroni, P., Giacomin, M.: On principle-based evaluation of extension-based argumentation semantics. Artif. Intell. 171(10–15), 675–700 (2007)
Baroni, P., Giacomin, M., Guida, G.: SCC-recursiveness: a general schema for argumentation semantics. Artif. Intell. 168(1–2), 162–210 (2005)
Baumann, R., Brewka, G., Ulbricht, M.: Comparing weak admissibility semantics to their dung-style counterparts-reduct, modularization, and strong equivalence in abstract argumentation. In: Proceedings of the the 17th International Conference on Principles of Knowledge Representation and Reasoning (KR2020) (2020)
Baumann, R., Brewka, G., Ulbricht, M.: Revisiting the foundations of abstract argumentation-semantics based on weak admissibility and weak defense. In: The Thirty-Fourth AAAI Conference on Artificial Intelligence, AAAI 2020, New York, USA, 7–12 February 2020. AAAI Press (2020). https://www.aaai.org/Library/AAAI/aaai20contents.php
Dauphin, J., Rienstra, T., van der Torre, L.: A principle-based analysis of weakly admissible semantics. In: Prakken, H., Bistarelli, S., Santini, F., Taticchi, C. (eds.) Computational Models of Argument-Proceedings of COMMA 2020, Perugia, Italy, September 4–11, 2020. Frontiers in Artificial Intelligence and Applications, vol. 326, pp. 167–178. IOS Press (2020). https://doi.org/10.3233/FAIA200502
Dondio, P., Longo, L.: Weakly complete semantics based on undecidedness blocking. arXiv preprint arXiv:2103.10701 (2021)
Dung, P.M.: On the acceptability of arguments and its fundamental role in non-monotonic reasoning, logic programming and n-person games. Artif. Intell. 77(2), 321–357 (1995)
van der Torre, L., Vesic, S.: The principle-based approach to abstract argumentation semantics. In: Baroni, P., Gabbay, D., Giacomin, M., van der Torre, L. (eds.) Handbook of Formal Argumentation, chap. 12, pp. 2735–2778. College Publications, London (2018)
