Assessing the Impact of Agents in Weighted Bipolar Argumentation Frameworks

Argumentation provides a formalism consisting of arguments and attacks/supports between these arguments and can be used to rank or deduce justified conclusions. In multi-agent settings, where several agents can advance arguments at the same time, understanding which agent has the most influence on a particular argument can improve an agent’s decision about which argument to advance next. In this paper, we introduce an argumentation framework with authorship and define new semantics to account for the impact of the agents on the arguments. We propose a set of desirable principles that such a semantics should satisfy, instantiate such semantics from two popular graded based semantics, and study to which extent these principles are satisfied. These semantics will allow an observer to identify the most influential agents in a debate.

[1]  Phan Minh Dung,et al.  On the Acceptability of Arguments and its Fundamental Role in Nonmonotonic Reasoning, Logic Programming and n-Person Games , 1995, Artif. Intell..

[2]  Ringo Baumann,et al.  Normal and strong expansion equivalence for argumentation frameworks , 2012, Artif. Intell..

[3]  Simon Parsons,et al.  A Generalization of Dung's Abstract Framework for Argumentation: Arguing with Sets of Attacking Arguments , 2006, ArgMAS.

[4]  Nicolas Maudet,et al.  A Comparative Study of Ranking-Based Semantics for Abstract Argumentation , 2016, AAAI.

[5]  Guillermo R. Simari,et al.  Temporal Defeasible Reasoning , 2001, Knowledge and Information Systems.

[6]  Extending Modular Semantics for Bipolar Weighted Argumentation , 2019, AAMAS.

[7]  Stefano Ferilli,et al.  On the Gradual Acceptability of Arguments in Bipolar Weighted Argumentation Frameworks with Degrees of Trust , 2017, ISMIS.

[8]  Leila Amgoud,et al.  Evaluation of Arguments in Weighted Bipolar Graphs , 2017, ECSQARU.

[9]  Guillermo Ricardo Simari,et al.  Bipolarity in temporal argumentation frameworks , 2017, Int. J. Approx. Reason..

[10]  Leila Amgoud,et al.  Weighted Bipolar Argumentation Graphs: Axioms and Semantics , 2018, IJCAI.

[11]  Todd Robinson.  Value of Information for Argumentation based Intelligence Analysis , 2021, ArXiv.

[12]  Iyad Rahwan,et al.  Argumentation in Multi-Agent Systems, Third International Workshop, ArgMAS 2006, Hakodate, Japan, May 8, 2006, Revised Selected and Invited Papers , 2007, ArgMAS.

[13]  Nico Potyka.  Continuous Dynamical Systems for Weighted Bipolar Argumentation , 2018, KR.

[14]  Claudette Cayrol,et al.  Argumentation update in YALLA (Yet Another Logic Language for Argumentation) , 2016, Int. J. Approx. Reason..

[15]  Leila Amgoud,et al.  Evaluation of arguments in weighted bipolar graphs , 2018, Int. J. Approx. Reason..

[16]  Pietro Baroni,et al.  Discontinuity-Free Decision Support with Quantitative Argumentation Debates , 2016, KR.

[17]  Madalina Croitoru,et al.  Ranking-Based Semantics for Sets of Attacking Arguments , 2020, AAAI.