Abstract
Collective argumentation studies how to reach a collective decision that is acceptable to the group in a debate. I introduce the concept of topological restriction to enrich collective argumentation. Topological restrictions are rational constraints assumed to be satisfied by individual agents. We assume that in a debate, for every pair of arguments that are being considered, every agent indicates whether the first one attacks the second, i.e., an agent’s argumentative stance is characterized as an argumentation framework, and only argumentation frameworks that satisfy topological restrictions are allowed. The topological constraints we consider in this paper include acyclicity, symmetry, as well as a newly defined topological property called t-self-defense. We show that when profiles of argumentation frameworks provided by agents satisfy topological restrictions, impossibility results during aggregation can be avoided. Furthermore, if a profile is topological-restricted with respect to t-self-defense, then the majority rule preserves admissibility during aggregation.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Notes
- 1.
A notable exception is conflict-freeness, which can be preserved by the majority rule [12].
References
Arrow, K.J., Sen, A.K., Suzumura, K. (eds.): Handbook of Social Choice and Welfare. North-Holland (2002)
Arrow, K.J.: Social Choice and Individual Values, 2nd edn. Wiley, Hoboken (1963). First edition published in 1951
Baroni, P., Giacomin, M.: Characterizing defeat graphs where argumentation semantics agree. In: Proceedings of the 1st International Workshop on Argumentation and Non-Monotonic Reasoning (ARGNMR07), pp. 33–48 (2007)
Baroni, P., Giacomin, M.: On principle-based evaluation of extension-based argumentation semantics. Artif. Intell. 171(10–15), 675–700 (2007)
Baroni, P., Giacomin, M., Guida, G.: SCC-recursiveness: a general schema for argumentation semantics. Artif. Intell. 168(1–2), 162–210 (2005)
Baumeister, D., Neugebauer, D., Rothe, J.: Collective acceptability in abstract argumentation. J. Appl. Log. 2631(6), 1503 (2021)
Bodanza, G.A., Tohmé, F.A., Auday, M.R.: Collective argumentation: a survey of aggregation issues around argumentation frameworks. Argument Comput. 8(1), 1–34 (2017)
Caminada, M., Pigozzi, G.: On judgment aggregation in abstract argumentation. J. Auton. Agents Multiagent Syst. 22(1), 64–102 (2011)
Chen, W.: Collective argumentation: the case of aggregating support-relations of bipolar argumentation frameworks. In: Proceedings of the 18th Conference on Theoretical Aspects of Rationality and Knowledge (TARK), pp. 87–102 (2021)
Chen, W.: Guaranteeing admissibility of abstract argumentation frameworks with rationality and feasibility constraints. J. Log. Comput. (2021, to appear). https://doi.org/10.1093/logcom/exab011
Chen, W., Endriss, U.: Aggregating alternative extensions of abstract argumentation frameworks: preservation results for quota rules. In: Proceedings of the 7th International Conference on Computational Models of Argument (COMMA). IOS Press (2018)
Chen, W., Endriss, U.: Preservation of semantic properties in collective argumentation: the case of aggregating abstract argumentation frameworks. Artif. Intell. 269, 27–48 (2019)
Coste-Marquis, S., Devred, C., Konieczny, S., Lagasquie-Schiex, M.C., Marquis, P.: On the merging of Dung’s argumentation systems. Artif. Intell. 171(10–15), 730–753 (2007)
Coste-Marquis, S., Devred, C., Marquis, P.: Symmetric argumentation frameworks. In: Godo, L. (ed.) ECSQARU 2005. LNCS (LNAI), vol. 3571, pp. 317–328. Springer, Heidelberg (2005). https://doi.org/10.1007/11518655_28
Dietrich, F., List, C.: Majority voting on restricted domains. J. Econ. Theory 145(2), 512–543 (2010)
Dung, P.M.: On the acceptability of arguments and its fundamental role in nonmonotonic reasoning, logic programming and \(n\)-person games. Artif. Intell. 77(2), 321–358 (1995)
Dung, P.M., Mancarella, P., Toni, F.: Computing ideal sceptical argumentation. Artif. Intell. 171(10), 642–674 (2007)
Endriss, U., Grandi, U.: Graph aggregation. Artif. Intell. 245, 86–114 (2017)
Grossi, D., Pigozzi, G.: Judgment Aggregation: A Primer. Synthesis Lectures on Artificial Intelligence and Machine Learning. Morgan & Claypool Publishers (2014)
List, C.: A possibility theorem on aggregation over multiple interconnected propositions. Math. Soc. Sci. 45(1), 1–13 (2003)
Rahwan, I., Tohmé, F.A.: Collective argument evaluation as judgement aggregation. In: Proceedings of the 9th International Conference on Autonomous Agents and Multiagent Systems (AAMAS), pp. 417–424. IFAAMAS (2010)
Sen, A.K.: A possibility theorem on majority decisions. Econometrica: J. Econometric Soc. 491–499 (1966)
Tohmé, F.A., Bodanza, G.A., Simari, G.R.: Aggregation of attack relations: a social-choice theoretical analysis of defeasibility criteria. In: Hartmann, S., Kern-Isberner, G. (eds.) FoIKS 2008. LNCS, vol. 4932, pp. 8–23. Springer, Heidelberg (2008). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-77684-0_4
Acknowledgments
I would like to thank three anonymous reviewers of CLAR-2020 for their helpful comments. This work was supported by the China Postdoctoral Science Foundation Grant (No. 2019M663352) and the Key Project of National Social Science Foundation of China (No. 16AZX017).
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2021 Springer Nature Switzerland AG
About this paper
Cite this paper
Chen, W. (2021). Collective Argumentation with Topological Restrictions. In: Baroni, P., Benzmüller, C., Wáng, Y.N. (eds) Logic and Argumentation. CLAR 2021. Lecture Notes in Computer Science(), vol 13040. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-89391-0_5
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-89391-0_5
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-030-89390-3
Online ISBN: 978-3-030-89391-0
eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)