A Plausibility Semantics for Abstract Argumentation Frameworks

TL;DR

This paper introduces a ranking-measure-based extension semantics for abstract argumentation frameworks, connecting structured, logical, and shallow instantiations, resulting in a novel well-justified semantics that differs from traditional methods.

Contribution

It presents a new plausibility semantics for argumentation frameworks based on ranking measures, bridging different semantic instantiations and diverging from traditional approaches.

Findings

Proposes a ranking-measure-based extension semantics.

Connects structured, logical, and shallow instantiations.

Introduces the well-justified JZ-extension semantics.

Abstract

We propose and investigate a simple ranking-measure-based extension semantics for abstract argumentation frameworks based on their generic instantiation by default knowledge bases and the ranking construction semantics for default reasoning. In this context, we consider the path from structured to logical to shallow semantic instantiations. The resulting well-justified JZ-extension semantics diverges from more traditional approaches.