On Labelling Statements in Multi-Labelling Argumentation
نویسندگان
چکیده
In computational models of argumentation, argument justification has attracted more attention than statement justification, and significant sensitivity losses are identifiable when dealing with the justification of statements by otherwise appealing formalisms. This paper reappraises statement justification as a formalism-independent component in argument-based reasoning. We introduce a novel general model of argument-based reasoning based on multiple stages of labellings, the last one being devoted to statement justification, identify two alternative paths from argument acceptance to statement justification, and compare their expressiveness. We then show that this model encompasses several prominent literature proposals as special cases, thereby enabling a systematic comparison of existing approaches to statement justification, evidencing their merits and limits. Finally we illustrate our model by specifying a generic ignorance-aware statement justification and showing how it can be seamlessly integrated into different formalisms.
منابع مشابه
A Labelling Framework for Probabilistic Argumentation
The combination of argumentation and probability paves the way to new accounts of qualitative and quantitative uncertainty, thereby offering new theoretical and applicative opportunities. Due to a variety of interests, probabilistic argumentation is approached in the literature with different frameworks, pertaining to structured and abstract argumentation, and with respect to diverse types of u...
متن کاملConditional Labelling for Abstract Argumentation
Agents engage in dialogues having as goals to make some arguments acceptable or unacceptable. To do so they may put forward arguments, adding them to the argumentation framework. Argumentation semantics can relate a change in the framework to the resulting extensions but it is not clear, given an argumentation framework and a desired acceptance state for a given set of arguments, which further ...
متن کاملA Labelling-Based Justification Status of Arguments
In this paper, we define a labelling-based justification status of the arguments in an argumentation framework. Our proposal allows for a more fine-grained notion of a justification status than the traditional extensions-based approaches. In particular, we are able to distinguish different levels at which an argument can be accepted or rejected. Our approach is fully compatible with traditional...
متن کاملComplete Assumption Labellings
Recently, argument labellings have been proposed as a new (equivalent) way to express the extension semantics of Abstract Argumentation (AA) frameworks. Here, we introduce a labelling approach for the complete semantics in Assumption-Based Argumentation (ABA), where labels are assigned to assumptions rather than whole arguments. We prove that the complete assumption labelling corresponds to the...
متن کامل