Bipolarity in Argumentation Graphs: Towards a Better Understanding
Different abstract argumentation frameworks have been used for various applications within multi-agents systems. Among them, bipolar frameworks make use of both attack and support relations between arguments. However, there is no single interpretation of the support, and the handling of bipolarity cannot avoid a deeper analysis of the notion of support. In this paper we consider three recent proposals for specializing the support relation in abstract argumentation : the deductive support, the necessary support and the evidential support. These proposals have been developed independently within different frameworks. We restate these proposals in a common setting, which enables us to undertake a comparative study of the modellings obtained for the three variants of the support. We highlight relationships and differences between these variants, namely a kind of duality between the deductive and the necessary interpretations of the support.
KeywordsEvidential Support Support Relation Argumentation Framework Direct Attack Attack Relation
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
- 1.Boella, G., Gabbay, D.M., van der Torre, L., Villata, S.: Support in abstract argumentation. In: Proc. of COMMA, pp. 111–122. IOS Press, Amsterdam (2010)Google Scholar
- 2.Brewka, G., Woltran, S.: Abstract dialectical frameworks. In: Proc. of KR, pp. 102–111 (2010)Google Scholar
- 7.Nouioua, F., Risch, V.: Bipolar argumentation frameworks with specialized supports. In: Proc. of ICTAI, pp. 215–218. IEEE Computer Society, Los Alamitos (2010)Google Scholar
- 8.Oren, N., Norman, T.J.: Semantics for evidence-based argumentation. In: Proc. of COMMA, pp. 276–284 (2008)Google Scholar
- 9.Oren, N., Reed, C., Luck, M.: Moving between argumentation frameworks. In: Proc. of COMMA, pp. 379–390. IOS Press, Amsterdam (2010)Google Scholar