---
title: "Ranking Extensions in Abstract Argumentation"
authors:
  - "Kenneth Skiba"
  - "Tjitze Rienstra"
  - "Matthias Thimm"
  - "Jesse Heyninck"
  - "Gabriele Kern-Isberner"
doi: "10.24963/ijcai.2021/282"
url: "https://ijcai.org/proceedings/2021/282"
pdf: "https://ijcai.org/proceedings/2021/0282.pdf"
venue: "Proceedings of the Thirtieth International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence"
year: 2021
pages: "2047-2053"
track: "Main Track"
keywords:
  - "Knowledge Representation and Reasoning: Computational Models of Argument"
---

# Ranking Extensions in Abstract Argumentation

Kenneth Skiba, Tjitze Rienstra, Matthias Thimm, Jesse Heyninck, Gabriele Kern-Isberner

*Proceedings of the Thirtieth International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence*, pages 2047-2053. DOI: [10.24963/ijcai.2021/282](https://doi.org/10.24963/ijcai.2021/282)

## Abstract

Extension-based semantics in abstract argumentation provide a criterion to determine whether a set of arguments is acceptable or not. In this paper, we present the notion of extension-ranking semantics, which determines a preordering over sets of arguments, where one set is deemed more plausible than another if it is somehow more acceptable. We obtain extension-based semantics as a special case of this new approach, but it also allows us to make more fine-grained distinctions, such as one set being "more complete'' or "more admissible'' than another.  We define a number of general principles to classify extension-ranking semantics and develop concrete approaches. We also study the relation between extension-ranking semantics and argument-ranking based semantics, which rank individual arguments instead of sets of arguments.