{"type":"ScholarlyArticle","title":"A Replication Study of Semantics in Argumentation","authors":[{"name":"Leila Amgoud","slug":"leila-amgoud","given":"Leila","family":"Amgoud","affiliation":"CNRS -IRIT , France"}],"abstract":"Argumentation aims at increasing acceptability of claims by supporting them with arguments. Roughly speaking, an argument is a set of premises intended to establish a definite claim. Its strength depends on the plausibility of the premises, the nature of the link between the premises and claim, and the prior acceptability of the claim. It may generally be weakened by other arguments that undermine one or more of its three components.\r\n\r\nEvaluation of arguments is a crucial task, and a sizable amount of methods, called semantics, has been proposed in the literature. This paper discusses two classifications of the existing semantics: the first one is based on the type of semantics' outcomes (sets of arguments, weighting, and preorder), the second is based on the goals pursued by the semantics (acceptability, strength, coalitions).","doi":"10.24963/ijcai.2019/874","url":"https://ijcai.org/proceedings/2019/874","pdf":"https://ijcai.org/proceedings/2019/0874.pdf","markdown":"https://ijcai.org/proceedings/2019/874.md","bibtex":"https://ijcai.org/proceedings/2019/bibtex/874","volume":{"slug":"2019","title":"Proceedings of the Twenty-Eighth International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence","short_title":"IJCAI 2019","url":"https://ijcai.org/proceedings/2019/","year":2019,"location":"Macao","dates":"10-16 August 2019","editors":"Sarit Kraus","isbn":"978-0-9992411-4-1","publisher":"International Joint Conferences on Artificial Intelligence Organization","doi_prefix":"10.24963/ijcai.2019"},"section":"Survey track","track":"Survey track","number":874,"pages":{"first":6260,"last":6266},"keywords":["Agent-based and Multi-agent Systems: Agreement Technologies: Argumentation","Knowledge Representation and Reasoning: Common-Sense Reasoning","Knowledge Representation and Reasoning: Computational Models of Argument"],"videos":[],"references":[{"position":1,"raw":"[Amgoud and Ben-Naim, 2013] Leila Amgoud and Jonathan Ben-Naim. Ranking-based semantics for argumentation frameworks. In Proc. of SUM, pages 134-147, 2013.","title":"Leila Amgoud and Jonathan Ben-Naim. Ranking-based semantics for argumentation frameworks","authors":"Ben-Naim Amgoud","year":"2013","venue":"Proc. of SUM","doi":null,"url":null,"internal_url":null},{"position":2,"raw":"[Amgoud and Ben-Naim, 2015] Leila Amgoud and Jonathan Ben-Naim. Argumentation-based ranking logics. In Proc. of AAMAS, pages 1511-1519, 2015.","title":"Leila Amgoud and Jonathan Ben-Naim. Argumentation-based ranking logics","authors":"Ben-Naim Amgoud","year":"2015","venue":"Proc. of AAMAS","doi":null,"url":null,"internal_url":null},{"position":3,"raw":"[Amgoud and Ben-Naim, 2016a] Leila Amgoud and Jonathan Ben-Naim. Axiomatic foundations of accept- ability semantics. In KR, pages 2-11, 2016.","title":"Axiomatic foundations of acceptability semantics","authors":"Ben-Naim ; Amgoud, Leila Amgoud, Jonathan Ben-Naim","year":"2016","venue":null,"doi":null,"url":null,"internal_url":null},{"position":4,"raw":"[Amgoud and Ben-Naim, 2016b] Leila Amgoud and Jonathan Ben-Naim. Evaluation of arguments from support relations: Axioms and semantics. In Proc. of IJCAI, pages 900-906, 2016.","title":"Evaluation of arguments from support relations: Axioms and semantics","authors":"Ben-Naim ; Amgoud, Leila Amgoud, Jonathan Ben-Naim","year":"2016","venue":"Proc. of IJCAI","doi":null,"url":null,"internal_url":"/proceedings/2016/132"},{"position":5,"raw":"[Amgoud and Doder, 2019] Leila Amgoud and Dragan Do- der. Acceptability semantics for weighted argumentation frameworks. In Proc. of AAMAS, pages 1270-1278, 2019.","title":"Leila Amgoud and Dragan Doder. Acceptability semantics for weighted argumentation frameworks","authors":"Doder Amgoud","year":"2019","venue":"Proc. of AAMAS","doi":null,"url":null,"internal_url":null},{"position":6,"raw":"[Amgoud and Serrurier, 2008] Leila Amgoud and Mathieu Serrurier. Agents that argue and explain classifications. JAAMAS, 16(2):187-209, 2008.","title":"Leila Amgoud and Mathieu Serrurier. Agents that argue and explain classifications","authors":"Serrurier Amgoud","year":"2008","venue":"JAAMAS","doi":null,"url":null,"internal_url":null},{"position":7,"raw":"[Amgoud et al., 2016] Leila Amgoud, Jonathan Ben-Naim, Dragan Doder, and Srdjan Vesic. Ranking arguments with compensation-based semantics. In Proc. of KR, pages 12- 21, 2016.","title":"Ranking arguments with compensation-based semantics","authors":"Leila Amgoud, Jonathan Ben-Naim, Dragan Doder, Srdjan Vesic","year":"2016","venue":"Proc. of KR","doi":null,"url":null,"internal_url":null},{"position":8,"raw":"[Amgoud et al., 2017] Leila Amgoud, Jonathan Ben-Naim, Dragan Doder, and Srdjan Vesic. Acceptability semantics for weighted argumentation frameworks. In Proc. of IJ- CAI, pages 56-62, 2017.","title":"Acceptability semantics for weighted argumentation frameworks","authors":"Leila Amgoud, Jonathan Ben-Naim, Dragan Doder, Srdjan Vesic","year":"2017","venue":"Proc. of IJ-CAI","doi":null,"url":null,"internal_url":"/proceedings/2017/9"},{"position":9,"raw":"[Atkinson et al., 2017] Katie Atkinson, Pietro Baroni, Mas- similiano Giacomin, Anthony Hunter, Henry Prakken, Chris Reed, Guillermo Ricardo Simari, Matthias Thimm, and Serena Villata. Towards artificial argumentation. AI Magazine, 38(3):25-36, 2017.","title":"Towards artificial argumentation","authors":"Katie Atkinson, Pietro Baroni, Massimiliano Giacomin, Anthony Hunter, Henry Prakken, Chris Reed, Guillermo Ricardo Simari, Matthias Thimm, Serena Villata","year":"2017","venue":"AI Magazine","doi":null,"url":null,"internal_url":null},{"position":10,"raw":"[Baroni et al., 2005] Pietro Baroni, Massimiliano Giacomin, and Giovanni Guida. SCC-recursiveness: a general schema for argumentation semantics. Artificial Intelli- gence, 168:162-210, 2005.","title":"SCC-recursiveness: a general schema for argumentation semantics","authors":"Pietro Baroni, Massimiliano Giacomin, Giovanni Guida","year":"2005","venue":"Artificial Intelligence","doi":null,"url":null,"internal_url":null},{"position":11,"raw":"[Baroni et al., 2015] Pietro Baroni, Marco Romano, Francesca Toni, Marco Aurisicchio, and Giorgio Bertanza. Automatic evaluation of design alternatives with quan- titative argumentation. Argument & Computation, 6(1):24-49, 2015.","title":"Automatic evaluation of design alternatives with quantitative argumentation","authors":"Pietro Baroni, Marco Romano, Francesca Toni, Marco Aurisicchio, Giorgio Bertanza","year":"2015","venue":"Argument & Computation","doi":null,"url":null,"internal_url":null},{"position":12,"raw":"[Besnard and Hunter, 2001] Philippe Besnard and Anthony Hunter. A logic-based theory of deductive arguments. Ar- tificial Intelligence, 128(1-2):203-235, 2001.","title":"A logic-based theory of deductive arguments","authors":"Philippe Besnard, Anthony Hunter","year":"2001","venue":"Artificial Intelligence","doi":null,"url":null,"internal_url":null},{"position":13,"raw":"[Bonzon et al., 2016] Elise Bonzon, Jérôme Delobelle, Sébastien Konieczny, and Nicolas Maudet. Argumenta- tion ranking semantics based on propagation. In Proc. of COMMA, pages 139-150, 2016.","title":"Argumentation ranking semantics based on propagation","authors":"Elise Bonzon, Jérôme Delobelle, Sébastien Konieczny, Nicolas Maudet","year":"2016","venue":"Proc. of COMMA","doi":null,"url":null,"internal_url":null},{"position":14,"raw":"[Bonzon et al., 2017] Elise Bonzon, Jérôme Delo- belle, Sébastien Konieczny, and Nicolas Maudet. A parametrized ranking-based semantics for persuasion. In Proc. of SUM, pages 237-251, 2017.","title":"A parametrized ranking-based semantics for persuasion","authors":"Elise Bonzon, Jérôme Delobelle, Sébastien Konieczny, Nicolas Maudet","year":"2017","venue":"Proc. of SUM","doi":null,"url":null,"internal_url":null},{"position":15,"raw":"[Bonzon et al., 2018] Elise Bonzon, Jérôme Delobelle, Sébastien Konieczny, and Nicolas Maudet. Combining extension-based semantics and ranking-based seman- tics for abstract argumentation. In Proc. of KR, pages 118-127, 2018.","title":"Combining extension-based semantics and ranking-based semantics for abstract argumentation","authors":"Elise Bonzon, Jérôme Delobelle, Sébastien Konieczny, Nicolas Maudet","year":"2018","venue":"Proc. of KR","doi":null,"url":null,"internal_url":null},{"position":16,"raw":"[Caminada, 2006] Martin Caminada. Semi-stable semantics. In Proc. of COMMA, pages 121-130, 2006.","title":"Semi-stable semantics","authors":"Martin Caminada","year":"2006","venue":"Proc. of COMMA","doi":null,"url":null,"internal_url":null},{"position":17,"raw":"[Cayrol and Lagasquie-Schiex, 2005] Claudette Cayrol and Marie-Christine Lagasquie-Schiex. Graduality in argu- mentation. JAIR, 23:245-297, 2005.","title":"Claudette Cayrol and Marie-Christine Lagasquie-Schiex. Graduality in argumentation","authors":"Lagasquie-Schiex Cayrol","year":"2005","venue":"JAIR","doi":null,"url":null,"internal_url":null},{"position":18,"raw":"[da Costa Pereira et al., 2011] Célia da Costa Pereira, An- drea Tettamanzi, and Serena Villata. Changing one's mind: Erase or rewind? In Proc. of IJCAI, pages 164-171, 2011.","title":"Célia da Costa Pereira, Andrea Tettamanzi, and Serena Villata. Changing one's mind: Erase or rewind?","authors":"Costa Da, Pereira","year":"2011","venue":"Proc. of IJCAI","doi":null,"url":null,"internal_url":null},{"position":19,"raw":"[Dondio, 2018] Pierpaolo Dondio. Ranking semantics based on subgraphs analysis. In Proc. of AAMAS, pages 1132- 1140, 2018.","title":"Ranking semantics based on subgraphs analysis","authors":"Pierpaolo Dondio","year":"2018","venue":"Proc. of AAMAS","doi":null,"url":null,"internal_url":null},{"position":20,"raw":"[Dung et al., 2007] Phan Dung, Paolo Mancarella, and Francesca Toni. Computing ideal skeptical argumentation. Artificial Intelligence, 171:642-674, 2007.","title":"Computing ideal skeptical argumentation","authors":"Dung","year":"2007","venue":"Artificial Intelligence","doi":null,"url":null,"internal_url":null},{"position":21,"raw":"[Dung, 1995] Phan Minh Dung. On the Acceptability of Arguments and its Fundamental Role in Non-Monotonic Reasoning, Logic Programming and n-Person Games. Ar- tificial Intelligence, 77:321-357, 1995.","title":"On the Acceptability of Arguments and its Fundamental Role in Non-Monotonic Reasoning, Logic Programming and n-Person Games","authors":"Phan Minh, Dung","year":"1995","venue":"Artificial Intelligence","doi":null,"url":null,"internal_url":null},{"position":22,"raw":"[Gabbay and Rodrigues, 2015] Dov Gabbay and Odinaldo Rodrigues. Equilibrium states in numerical argumentation networks. Logica Universalis, 9(4):411-473, 2015.","title":"Equilibrium states in numerical argumentation networks","authors":"Rodrigues Gabbay, Dov Gabbay, Odinaldo Rodrigues","year":"2015","venue":"Logica Universalis","doi":null,"url":null,"internal_url":null},{"position":23,"raw":"[Hunter, 2013] Anthony Hunter. A probabilistic approach to modelling uncertain logical arguments. I. Journal of Ap- proximate Reasoning, 54(1):47-81, 2013.","title":"A probabilistic approach to modelling uncertain logical arguments","authors":"Anthony Hunter","year":"2013","venue":"I. Journal of Approximate Reasoning","doi":null,"url":null,"internal_url":null},{"position":24,"raw":"[Leite and Martins, 2011] João Leite and João Martins. So- cial abstract argumentation. In Proc. of IJCAI, pages 2287-2292, 2011.","title":"Social abstract argumentation","authors":"João Leite, João Martins","year":"2011","venue":"Proc. of IJCAI","doi":null,"url":null,"internal_url":"/proceedings/2011/381"},{"position":25,"raw":"[Lin and Shoham, 1989] Fangzhen Lin and Yoav Shoham. Argument systems -an uniform basis for non-monotonic reasoning. In Proc. of KR, pages 245 -255, 1989.","title":"Argument systems -an uniform basis for non-monotonic reasoning","authors":"Lin, Shoham ;, Fangzhen Lin, Yoav Shoham","year":"1989","venue":"Proc. of KR","doi":null,"url":null,"internal_url":null},{"position":26,"raw":"[Pu et al., 2014] Fuan Pu, Jian Luo, Yulai Zhang, and Guim- ing Luo. Argument ranking with categoriser function. In In Proc. of KSEM, pages 290-301, 2014.","title":"Argument ranking with categoriser function","authors":"Fuan Pu, Jian Luo, Yulai Zhang, Guiming Luo","year":"2014","venue":"Proc. of KSEM","doi":null,"url":null,"internal_url":null},{"position":27,"raw":"[Rago et al., 2016] Antonio Rago, Francesca Toni, Marco Aurisicchio, and Pietro Baroni. Discontinuity-free deci- sion support with quantitative argumentation debates. In Proc. of KR, pages 63-73, 2016.","title":"Discontinuity-free decision support with quantitative argumentation debates","authors":"Rago","year":"2016","venue":"Proc. of KR","doi":null,"url":null,"internal_url":null},{"position":28,"raw":"[Rahwan et al., 2010] Iyad Rahwan, Mohammed Iqbal Madakkatel, Jean Bonnefon, Ruqiyabi Naz Awan, and Sherief Abdallah. Behavioral experiments for assessing the abstract argumentation semantics of reinstatement. Cognitive Science, 34(8):1483-1502, 2010.","title":"Behavioral experiments for assessing the abstract argumentation semantics of reinstatement","authors":"Rahwan","year":"2010","venue":"Cognitive Science","doi":null,"url":null,"internal_url":null},{"position":29,"raw":"[Rosenfeld and Kraus, 2014] Ariel Rosenfeld and Sarit Kraus. Argumentation theory in the field: An empirical study of fundamental notions. In Proc. of the Workshop on Frontiers and Connections between Argumentation Theory and Natural Language Processing, 2014.","title":"Argumentation theory in the field: An empirical study of fundamental notions","authors":"Kraus Rosenfeld, Ariel Rosenfeld, Sarit Kraus","year":"2014","venue":"Proc. of the Workshop on Frontiers and Connections between Argumentation Theory and Natural Language Processing","doi":null,"url":null,"internal_url":null},{"position":30,"raw":"[Rosenfeld and Kraus, 2015] Ariel Rosenfeld and Sarit Kraus. Providing arguments in discussions based on the prediction of human argumentative behavior. In Proc. of AAAI, pages 1320-1327, 2015.","title":"Providing arguments in discussions based on the prediction of human argumentative behavior","authors":"Kraus Rosenfeld, Ariel Rosenfeld, Sarit Kraus","year":"2015","venue":"Proc. of AAAI","doi":null,"url":null,"internal_url":null},{"position":31,"raw":"[Rosenfeld and Kraus, 2016] Ariel Rosenfeld and Sarit Kraus. Strategical argumentative agent for human persuasion. In Proc. of ECAI, pages 320-328, 2016.","title":"Strategical argumentative agent for human persuasion","authors":"Kraus Rosenfeld, Ariel Rosenfeld, Sarit Kraus","year":"2016","venue":"Proc. of ECAI","doi":null,"url":null,"internal_url":null},{"position":32,"raw":"[Simari and Loui, 1992] Guillermo Ricardo Simari and Ronald Prescott Loui. A mathematical treatment of defeasible reasoning and its implementation. Artificial Intelligence, 53(2-3):125-157, 1992.","title":"A mathematical treatment of defeasible reasoning and its implementation","authors":"Loui Simari","year":"1992","venue":"Artificial Intelligence","doi":null,"url":null,"internal_url":null},{"position":33,"raw":"[van der Torre and Vesic, 2017] Leon van der Torre and Srd- jan Vesic. The principle-based approach to abstract argu- mentation semantics. FLAP, 4(8), 2017.","title":"Leon van der Torre and Srdjan Vesic. The principle-based approach to abstract argumentation semantics","authors":"Torre Van Der, Vesic","year":"2017","venue":"FLAP","doi":null,"url":null,"internal_url":null},{"position":34,"raw":"[Zhong et al., 2019] Qiaoting Zhong, Xiuyi Fan, Xudong Luo, and Francesca Toni. An explainable multi-attribute decision model based on argumentation. Expert Systems with Applications, 117:42-61, 2019.","title":"An explainable multi-attribute decision model based on argumentation","authors":"Zhong","year":"2019","venue":"Expert Systems with Applications","doi":null,"url":null,"internal_url":null}],"license_note":"Copyright International Joint Conferences on Artificial Intelligence."}