Abstract
The paper studies semantics that evaluate arguments in argumentation graphs, where
each argument has a basic strength, and may be attacked by other arguments. It starts
by defining a set of principles, each of which is a property that a semantics could
satisfy. It provides the first formal analysis and comparison of existing semantics.
Finally, it defines three novel semantics that satisfy more principles than existing ones.
Keywords
- Agent-based and Multi-agent Systems: Agreement Technologies: Argumentation
- Knowledge Representation, Reasoning, and Logic: Computational models of Argument
