Degrees of “in”, “out” and “undecided” in Argumentation Networks

Dov M. Gabbay; Odinaldo Rodrigues

doi:10.3233/978-1-61499-686-6-319

Degrees of “in”, “out” and “undecided” in Argumentation Networks

Dov M. Gabbay, Odinaldo Rodrigues

Department of Computer Science

Research output: Chapter in Book/Report/Conference proceeding › Conference contribution › peer-review

4 Scopus citations

Abstract

The traditional 3-valued semantics of an argumentation framework 〈A, R〉 identifies arguments that are “in”, “out” and “undecided”. Yet, it has long been recognised by the community that some elements can be at different degrees in each of these categories [1,2,3]. For example, Dung’s semantics can only classify some elements as “out”, but cannot reflect how much “out” they really are or if elements are “in” are they as much “in” as elements which are not attacked at all? In this paper we shall use a numerical approach to give a measure of “in”, “out” and “undecided” to the nodes of a network. We shall devise equations which allow for solutions that reflect these distinctions.

Original language	English
Title of host publication	Frontiers in Artificial Intelligence and Applications
Editors	Pietro Baroni, Thomas F. Gordon, Tatjana Scheffler, Manfred Stede
Publisher	IOS Press BV
Pages	319-326
Number of pages	8
ISBN (Electronic)	9781614996859
DOIs	https://doi.org/10.3233/978-1-61499-686-6-319
State	Published - 2016
Event	6th International Conference on Computational Models of Argument, COMMA 2016 - Potsdam, Germany Duration: 12 Sep 2016 → 16 Sep 2016

Publication series

Name	Frontiers in Artificial Intelligence and Applications
Volume	287
ISSN (Print)	0922-6389
ISSN (Electronic)	1879-8314

Conference

Conference	6th International Conference on Computational Models of Argument, COMMA 2016
Country/Territory	Germany
City	Potsdam
Period	12/09/16 → 16/09/16

Bibliographical note

Publisher Copyright:
© 2016 The authors and IOS Press.

Keywords

Numerical argumentation
degrees of acceptance
numerical methods

Access to Document

10.3233/978-1-61499-686-6-319

Cite this

Gabbay, D. M., & Rodrigues, O. (2016). Degrees of “in”, “out” and “undecided” in Argumentation Networks. In P. Baroni, T. F. Gordon, T. Scheffler, & M. Stede (Eds.), Frontiers in Artificial Intelligence and Applications (pp. 319-326). (Frontiers in Artificial Intelligence and Applications; Vol. 287). IOS Press BV. https://doi.org/10.3233/978-1-61499-686-6-319

@inproceedings{194681442b534042990e1bb9340fc74c,

title = "Degrees of “in”, “out” and “undecided” in Argumentation Networks",

abstract = "The traditional 3-valued semantics of an argumentation framework 〈A, R〉 identifies arguments that are “in”, “out” and “undecided”. Yet, it has long been recognised by the community that some elements can be at different degrees in each of these categories [1,2,3]. For example, Dung{\textquoteright}s semantics can only classify some elements as “out”, but cannot reflect how much “out” they really are or if elements are “in” are they as much “in” as elements which are not attacked at all? In this paper we shall use a numerical approach to give a measure of “in”, “out” and “undecided” to the nodes of a network. We shall devise equations which allow for solutions that reflect these distinctions.",

keywords = "Numerical argumentation, degrees of acceptance, numerical methods",

author = "Gabbay, {Dov M.} and Odinaldo Rodrigues",

note = "Publisher Copyright: {\textcopyright} 2016 The authors and IOS Press.; 6th International Conference on Computational Models of Argument, COMMA 2016 ; Conference date: 12-09-2016 Through 16-09-2016",

year = "2016",

doi = "10.3233/978-1-61499-686-6-319",

language = "אנגלית",

series = "Frontiers in Artificial Intelligence and Applications",

publisher = "IOS Press BV",

pages = "319--326",

editor = "Pietro Baroni and Gordon, {Thomas F.} and Tatjana Scheffler and Manfred Stede",

booktitle = "Frontiers in Artificial Intelligence and Applications",

address = "הולנד",

}

Gabbay, DM & Rodrigues, O 2016, Degrees of “in”, “out” and “undecided” in Argumentation Networks. in P Baroni, TF Gordon, T Scheffler & M Stede (eds), Frontiers in Artificial Intelligence and Applications. Frontiers in Artificial Intelligence and Applications, vol. 287, IOS Press BV, pp. 319-326, 6th International Conference on Computational Models of Argument, COMMA 2016, Potsdam, Germany, 12/09/16. https://doi.org/10.3233/978-1-61499-686-6-319

Degrees of “in”, “out” and “undecided” in Argumentation Networks. / Gabbay, Dov M.; Rodrigues, Odinaldo.
Frontiers in Artificial Intelligence and Applications. ed. / Pietro Baroni; Thomas F. Gordon; Tatjana Scheffler; Manfred Stede. IOS Press BV, 2016. p. 319-326 (Frontiers in Artificial Intelligence and Applications; Vol. 287).

Research output: Chapter in Book/Report/Conference proceeding › Conference contribution › peer-review

TY - GEN

T1 - Degrees of “in”, “out” and “undecided” in Argumentation Networks

AU - Gabbay, Dov M.

AU - Rodrigues, Odinaldo

PY - 2016

Y1 - 2016

N2 - The traditional 3-valued semantics of an argumentation framework 〈A, R〉 identifies arguments that are “in”, “out” and “undecided”. Yet, it has long been recognised by the community that some elements can be at different degrees in each of these categories [1,2,3]. For example, Dung’s semantics can only classify some elements as “out”, but cannot reflect how much “out” they really are or if elements are “in” are they as much “in” as elements which are not attacked at all? In this paper we shall use a numerical approach to give a measure of “in”, “out” and “undecided” to the nodes of a network. We shall devise equations which allow for solutions that reflect these distinctions.

AB - The traditional 3-valued semantics of an argumentation framework 〈A, R〉 identifies arguments that are “in”, “out” and “undecided”. Yet, it has long been recognised by the community that some elements can be at different degrees in each of these categories [1,2,3]. For example, Dung’s semantics can only classify some elements as “out”, but cannot reflect how much “out” they really are or if elements are “in” are they as much “in” as elements which are not attacked at all? In this paper we shall use a numerical approach to give a measure of “in”, “out” and “undecided” to the nodes of a network. We shall devise equations which allow for solutions that reflect these distinctions.

KW - Numerical argumentation

KW - degrees of acceptance

KW - numerical methods

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85049751603&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.3233/978-1-61499-686-6-319

DO - 10.3233/978-1-61499-686-6-319

M3 - ???researchoutput.researchoutputtypes.contributiontobookanthology.conference???

AN - SCOPUS:85049751603

T3 - Frontiers in Artificial Intelligence and Applications

SP - 319

EP - 326

BT - Frontiers in Artificial Intelligence and Applications

A2 - Baroni, Pietro

A2 - Gordon, Thomas F.

A2 - Scheffler, Tatjana

A2 - Stede, Manfred

PB - IOS Press BV

T2 - 6th International Conference on Computational Models of Argument, COMMA 2016

Y2 - 12 September 2016 through 16 September 2016

ER -

Degrees of “in”, “out” and “undecided” in Argumentation Networks

Abstract

Publication series

Conference

Bibliographical note

Keywords

Access to Document

Other files and links

Fingerprint

Cite this