PP-2018-17: Aggregating Alternative Extensions of Abstract Argumentation Frameworks: Preservation Results for Quota Rules

PP-2018-17: Chen, Weiwei and Endriss, Ulle (2018) Aggregating Alternative Extensions of Abstract Argumentation Frameworks: Preservation Results for Quota Rules. [Pre-print]

[thumbnail of ChenEndrissCOMMA2018.pdf]
Preview
Text
ChenEndrissCOMMA2018.pdf

Download (154kB) | Preview

Abstract

When confronted with the same abstract argumentation framework, specifying a set of arguments and an attack-relation between them, different agents may disagree on which arguments to accept, i.e., they may choose different extensions. In the context of designing systems to support collective argumentation, we may then wish to aggregate such alternative extensions into a single extension that appropriately reflects the views of the group as a whole. Focusing on a conceptually and computationally simple family of aggregation rules, the quota rules, we analyse under what circumstances relevant properties of extensions shared by all extensions reported by the individual agents will be preserved under aggregation. The properties we consider are the classical properties of argumentation semantics, such as being a conflict-free, a complete, or a preferred extension. We show that, while for some properties there are quota rules that guarantee their preservation, for the more demanding properties it is impossible to do so in general.

Item Type: Pre-print
Report Nr: PP-2018-17
Series Name: Prepublication (PP) Series
Year: 2018
Subjects: Computation
Logic
Mathematics
Philosophy
Depositing User: Ulle Endriss
Date Deposited: 12 Aug 2019 13:51
Last Modified: 12 Aug 2019 13:51
URI: https://eprints.illc.uva.nl/id/eprint/1693

Actions (login required)

View Item View Item