Preservation of Semantic Properties during the Aggregation of Abstract Argumentation Frameworks

TL;DR

This paper investigates how to aggregate multiple agents' abstract argumentation frameworks while preserving key semantic properties, using social choice theory to identify conditions for maintaining consensus on argument acceptability.

Contribution

It introduces a formal analysis of semantic property preservation during aggregation of argumentation frameworks using social choice principles.

Findings

Identifies conditions for preserving semantic properties during aggregation.

Provides theoretical insights into consensus maintenance in multi-agent argumentation.

Highlights limitations and possibilities for collective argumentation modeling.

Abstract

An abstract argumentation framework can be used to model the argumentative stance of an agent at a high level of abstraction, by indicating for every pair of arguments that is being considered in a debate whether the first attacks the second. When modelling a group of agents engaged in a debate, we may wish to aggregate their individual argumentation frameworks to obtain a single such framework that reflects the consensus of the group. Even when agents disagree on many details, there may well be high-level agreement on important semantic properties, such as the acceptability of a given argument. Using techniques from social choice theory, we analyse under what circumstances such semantic properties agreed upon by the individual agents can be preserved under aggregation.