Semi-Abstract Value-Based Argumentation Framework
Jovan Jeromela

TL;DR
This paper introduces a semi-abstract value-based argumentation framework that links propositional claims to ordered values and demonstrates its expressivity through a complex moral dilemma.
Contribution
It presents a novel semi-abstract value-based argumentation framework and illustrates its application to complex moral dilemmas, expanding the expressivity of argumentation models.
Findings
Introduces a new semi-abstract value-based argumentation framework
Links propositional formulae to ordered values in arguments
Shows the framework's expressivity with a complex moral dilemma
Abstract
In his seminal paper, Phan Minh Dung (1995) proposed abstract argumentation framework, which models argumentation using directed graphs where structureless arguments are the nodes and attacks among the arguments are the edges. In the following years, many extensions of this framework were introduced. These extensions typically add a certain form of structure to the arguments. This thesis showcases two such extensions -- value-based argumentation framework by Trevor Bench-Capon (2002) and semi-abstract argumentation framework by Esther Anna Corsi and Christian Ferm\"uller (2017). The former introduces a mapping function that links individual arguments to a set of ordered values, enabling a distinction between objectively and subjectively acceptable arguments. The latter links claims of individual arguments to propositional formulae and then applies newly-introduced attack principles in…
Peer Reviews
No public reviews on file for this paper yet. If you reviewed it on a platform where reviews are public (OpenReview, ICLR, NeurIPS, ICML), you can paste yours below so the community can read it here.
Videos
No videos yet. Explain this paper in a talk, walkthrough, or lecture? Add one.
Taxonomy
TopicsMulti-Agent Systems and Negotiation
