Cogent argument extensions are weakly admissible but not vice versa

TL;DR

This paper explores the relationship between cogent and weakly admissible argumentation semantics, establishing that cogent extensions are a subset of weakly admissible ones, but not vice versa, clarifying their hierarchical relationship.

Contribution

It formally proves the subset relationship between cogent and weakly admissible semantics and shows that the converse does not hold, clarifying their hierarchical connection.

Findings

Cogent extensions are weakly admissible.

The converse that weakly admissible are cogent is false.

The relationship clarifies the hierarchy of argumentation semantics.

Abstract

In this research note, we show the relationship between two non-admissible argumentation framework semantics: cogent and weakly admissible semantics. We prove that, while cogent extensions are weakly admissible, the converse is not true.