Abstract
Dung’s argumentation is based on a Boolean binary defeat relation. Recently, this framework has been extended in order to consider the strength of the defeat relation, i.e., to quantify the degree to which an argument defeats another one. In the extended framework, the defeat relation with varied strength is abstract, i.e., its origin is not known. In this paper, we instantiate argumentation framework with varied-strength defeats by a preference-based argumentation framework with a certainty degree in the preference relation. A potential example of such valued preference relation is when a weight can be assigned to each argument. In this case, we give conditions on the construction of the valued preference relation from the weight. Moreover, we show that the set of conditions in which a defense holds with a valued preference relation is strictly included in the set of conditions in which a defense holds with a Boolean preference relation.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution.
Buying options
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Learn about institutional subscriptionsPreview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
References
Amgoud, L., Cayrol, C.: Inferring from inconsistency in preference-based argumentation frameworks. International Journal of Approximate Reasoning 29(2), 125–169 (2002)
Amgoud, L., Cayrol, C., LeBerre, D.: Comparing arguments using preference orderings for argument-based reasoning. In: ICTAI 1996, pp. 400–403 (1996)
Barringer, H., Gabbay, D.M., Woods, J.: Temporal dynamics of support and attack networks: From argumentation to zoology. In: Hutter, D., Stephan, W. (eds.) Mechanizing Mathematical Reasoning. LNCS (LNAI), vol. 2605, pp. 59–98. Springer, Heidelberg (2005)
Bench-Capon, T.J.M.: Persuasion in practical argument using value-based argumentation frameworks. Journal of Logic and Computation 13(3), 429–448 (2003)
Cayrol, C., Devred, C., Lagasquie-Schiex, M.C.: Acceptability semantics accounting for strength of attacks in argumentation. In: ECAI, pp. 995–996 (2010)
Dimopoulos, Y., Moraitis, P., Amgoud, L.: Extending argumentation to make good decisions. In: Rossi, F., Tsoukias, A. (eds.) ADT 2009. LNCS, vol. 5783, pp. 225–236. Springer, Heidelberg (2009)
Dung, P.M.: On the acceptability of arguments and its fundamental role in non-monotonic reasoning, logic programming and n-person games. Artificial Intelligence 77, 321–357 (1995)
Dunne, P.E., Hunter, A., McBurney, P., Parsons, S., Wooldridge, M.: Inconsistency tolerance in weighted argument systems. In: AAMAS, pp. 851–858 (2009)
Fodor, J., Roubens, M.: Fuzzy preference modelling and multi-criteria decision aid. Kluwer Academic Publisher, Boston (1994)
Kaci, S.: Refined preference-based argumentation frameworks. In: COMMA, pp. 299–310 (2010)
Kaci, S., Labreuche, C.: Preference-based argumentation framework with varied-preference intensity. In: ECAI, pp. 1003–1004 (2010)
Kaci, S., van der Torre, L.: Preference-based argumentation: Arguments supporting multiple values. International Journal of Approximate Reasoning 48, 730–751 (2008)
Martínez, D.C., García, A.J., Simari, G.R.: An abstract argumentation framework with varied-strength attacks. In: KR, pp. 135–144 (2008)
Martínez, D.C., García, A.J., Simari, G.R.: Strong and weak forms of abstract argument defense. In: COMMA, pp. 216–227 (2008)
Modgil, S.: Reasoning about preferences in argumentation frameworks. Artificial Intelligence 173(9-10), 901–934 (2009)
Simari, G.R., Loui, R.P.: A mathematical treatment of defeasible reasoning and its implementation. Artificial Intelligence 53, 125–157 (1992)
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2011 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg
About this paper
Cite this paper
Kaci, S., Labreuche, C. (2011). Arguing with Valued Preference Relations. In: Liu, W. (eds) Symbolic and Quantitative Approaches to Reasoning with Uncertainty. ECSQARU 2011. Lecture Notes in Computer Science(), vol 6717. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-22152-1_6
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-22152-1_6
Publisher Name: Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg
Print ISBN: 978-3-642-22151-4
Online ISBN: 978-3-642-22152-1
eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)