Assumption-Based Approaches to Reasoning with Priorities

TL;DR

This paper explores various methods for managing preferences in argumentation frameworks with strict rules and assumptions, providing translations between different approaches to unify understanding.

Contribution

It offers a comparative analysis and translation methods between non-prioritized defeats, preference-based defeats, and extended preference-based defeats.

Findings

Established formal translations between different preference handling systems.

Clarified the relationships and differences among various defeat notions.

Enhanced understanding of preference integration in argumentation frameworks.

Abstract

This paper maps out the relation between different approaches for handling preferences in argumentation with strict rules and defeasible assumptions by offering translations between them. The systems we compare are: non-prioritized defeats i.e. attacks, preference-based defeats, and preference-based defeats extended with reverse defeat.