On Controversiality of Arguments and Stratified Labelings
نویسندگان
چکیده
We investigate the space of ordinal semantics, where the status of an argument is interpreted by a natural number. In doing so we do not only consider the usual acceptability-based approach for generalizing classical semantics to multivalued semantics, i. e., positioning “undecided” arguments to be in between “in” and “out” arguments, but also a controversiality-based approach where we interpret the value “undecided” as being the most controversial status of an argument. We introduce stratified labelings as a novel semantical approach that follows the idea of a controversiality-based order of truth-values. We investigate general properties for ordinal semantics and of our approach of stratified labelings in particular.
منابع مشابه
Stratified Labelings for Abstract Argumentation (Preliminary Report)
argumentation frameworks [Dun95] take a very simple view on argumentation as they do not presuppose any internal structure of an argument. Abstract argumentation frameworks only consider the interactions of arguments by means of an attack relation between arguments. Definition 1 (Abstract Argumentation Framework). An abstract argumentation framework AF is a tuple AF = (Arg,→) where Arg is a set...
متن کامل4 A ug 2 01 3 Stratified Labelings for Abstract Argumentation ( Preliminary Report )
argumentation frameworks [Dun95] take a very simple view on argumentation as they do not presuppose any internal structure of an argument. Abstract argumentation frameworks only consider the interactions of arguments by means of an attack relation between arguments. Definition 1 (Abstract Argumentation Framework). An abstract argumentation framework AF is a tuple AF = (Arg,→) where Arg is a set...
متن کاملStratified Labelings for Abstract Argumentation
argumentation frameworks [Dun95] take a very simple view on argumentation as they do not presuppose any internal structure of an argument. Abstract argumentation frameworks only consider the interactions of arguments by means of an attack relation between arguments. Definition 1 (Abstract Argumentation Framework). An abstract argumentation framework AF is a tuple AF = (Arg,→) where Arg is a set...
متن کاملExtractive vs. NLG-based Abstractive Summarization of Evaluative Text: The Effect of Corpus Controversiality
Extractive summarization is the strategy of concatenating extracts taken from a corpus into a summary, while abstractive summarization involves paraphrasing the corpus using novel sentences. We define a novel measure of corpus controversiality of opinions contained in evaluative text, and report the results of a user study comparing extractive and NLG-based abstractive summarization at differen...
متن کاملConstructions of antimagic labelings for some families of regular graphs
In this paper we construct antimagic labelings of the regular complete multipartite graphs and we also extend the construction to some families of regular graphs.
متن کامل