PP-2016-14: Airiau, Stéphane and Bonzon, Elise and Endriss, Ulle and Maudet, Nicolas and Rossit, Julien (2016) Rationalisation of Profiles of Abstract Argumentation Frameworks. [Report]
Preview |
Text (Full Text)
PP-2016-14.text.pdf Download (287kB) | Preview |
![[thumbnail of Abstract]](https://eprints.illc.uva.nl/style/images/fileicons/text.png) |
Text (Abstract)
PP-2016-14.abstract.txt Download (1kB) |
Abstract
Different agents may have different points of view. This can be modelled using different abstract argumentation frameworks, each consisting of a set of arguments and a binary attack-relation between them. A question arising in this context is whether the diversity of views observed in such a profile of argumentation frameworks is consistent with the assumption that every individual argumentation framework is induced by a combination of, first, some basic factual attack-relation between the arguments and, second, the personal preferences of the agent concerned. We treat this question of rationalisability of a profile as an algorithmic problem and identify tractable and intractable cases. This is useful for understanding what types of profiles can reasonably be expected to come up in a multiagent system.
| Item Type: | Report |
|---|---|
| Report Nr: | PP-2016-14 |
| Series Name: | Prepublication (PP) Series |
| Year: | 2016 |
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | argumentation, social choice theory, multiagent systems |
| Depositing User: | Ulle Endriss |
| Date Deposited: | 12 Oct 2016 14:37 |
| Last Modified: | 12 Oct 2016 14:37 |
| URI: | https://eprints.illc.uva.nl/id/eprint/550 |
Actions (login required)
 |
View Item |
