How Many Properties Do We Need for Gradual Argumentation?

Authors

  • Pietro Baroni Universit√† degli Studi di Brescia
  • Antonio Rago Imperial College London
  • Francesca Toni Imperial College London

Keywords:

Bipolar Argumentation, Quantitative Argumentation, Gradual Evaluation

Abstract

The study of properties of gradual evaluation methods in argumentation has received increasing attention in recent years, with studies devoted to various classes of frameworks/methods leading to conceptually similar but formally distinct properties in different contexts. In this paper we provide a systematic analysis for this research landscape by making three main contributions. First, we identify groups of conceptually related properties in the literature, which can be regarded as based on common patterns and, using these patterns, we evidence that many further properties can be considered. Then, we provide a simplifying and unifying perspective for these properties by showing that they are all implied by the parametric principles of (either strict or non-strict) balance and monotonicity. Finally, we show that (instances of) these principles are satisfied by several quantitative argumentation formalisms in the literature, thus confirming their general validity and their utility to support a compact, yet comprehensive, analysis of properties of gradual argumentation.

Downloads

Published

2018-04-25

How to Cite

Baroni, P., Rago, A., & Toni, F. (2018). How Many Properties Do We Need for Gradual Argumentation?. Proceedings of the AAAI Conference on Artificial Intelligence, 32(1). Retrieved from https://ojs.aaai.org/index.php/AAAI/article/view/11544

Issue

Section

AAAI Technical Track: Knowledge Representation and Reasoning