Necessary and Sufficient Explanations in Abstract Argumentation

11/04/2020
by   Annemarie Borg, et al.
0

In this paper, we discuss necessary and sufficient explanations for formal argumentation - the question whether and why a certain argument can be accepted (or not) under various extension-based semantics. Given a framework with which explanations for argumentation-based conclusions can be derived, we study necessity and sufficiency: what (sets of) arguments are necessary or sufficient for the (non-)acceptance of an argument?

READ FULL TEXT

page 1

page 2

page 3

page 4

research
07/07/2021

Contrastive Explanations for Argumentation-Based Conclusions

In this paper we discuss contrastive explanations for formal argumentati...
research
04/21/2011

Algorithms and Complexity Results for Persuasive Argumentation

The study of arguments as abstract entities and their interaction as int...
research
11/21/2022

Explaining Random Forests using Bipolar Argumentation and Markov Networks (Technical Report)

Random forests are decision tree ensembles that can be used to solve a v...
research
07/28/2023

Teach Me How to Improve My Argumentation Skills: A Survey on Feedback in Argumentation

The use of argumentation in education has been shown to improve critical...
research
07/15/2020

Deep Learning for Abstract Argumentation Semantics

In this paper, we present a learning-based approach to determining accep...
research
05/26/2014

Judgment Aggregation in Multi-Agent Argumentation

Given a set of conflicting arguments, there can exist multiple plausible...
research
07/25/2023

Argument Attribution Explanations in Quantitative Bipolar Argumentation Frameworks (Technical Report)

Argumentative explainable AI has been advocated by several in recent yea...

Please sign up or login with your details

Forgot password? Click here to reset