Abstract
The paper considers the problem of in what circumstances an aggregation rule guarantees an admissible output extension that represents a good compromise between several input extensions of abstract argumentation framework, each provided by a different individual. To achieve this, we introduce the concept of concrete admissibility for abstract argumentations by strengthening Dung’s admissibility. We also define a model for extension aggregation that clearly separates the constraint supposed to be satisfied by individuals and the constraint that must be met by the collective decision. Using this model, we show that the majority rule guarantees admissible sets on newly defined admissible sets.
Supported by the MOE Project of Key Research Institute of Humanities and Social Sciences in Universities, No. 18JJD720005, the China Postdoctoral Science Foundation Grant, No. 2019M663352, and the Philosophy and Social Science Youth Projects of Guangdong Province, No. GD19CZX03.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
References
Awad, E., Booth, R., Tohmé, F., Rahwan, I.: Judgement aggregation in multi-agent argumentation. J. Logic Comput. 27(1), 227–259 (2017)
Baroni, P., Caminada, M., Giacomin, M.: An introduction to argumentation semantics. Knowl. Eng. Rev. 26(4), 365–410 (2011)
Besnard, P., Doutre, S.: Checking the acceptability of a set of arguments. In: Proceedings of the 10th International Workshop on Non-Monotonic Reasoning (NMR) (2004)
Booth, R., Awad, E., Rahwan, I.: Interval methods for judgment aggregation in argumentation. In: Proceedings of the 14th International Conference on Principles of Knowledge Representation and Reasoning (KR) (2014)
Caminada, M., Pigozzi, G.: On judgment aggregation in abstract argumentation. J. Auton. Agents Multiagent Syst. 22(1), 64–102 (2011)
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)
Dietrich, F., List, C.: Judgment aggregation by quota rules: majority voting generalized. J. Theor. Politics 19(4), 391–424 (2007)
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)
Endriss, U.: Judgment aggregation. In: Brandt, F., Conitzer, V., Endriss, U., Lang, J., Procaccia, A.D. (eds.) Handbook of Computational Social Choice, pp. 399–426. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge (2016). Chap. 17
Endriss, U.: Judgment aggregation with rationality and feasibility constraints. In: Proceedings of the 17th International Conference on Autonomous Agents and Multiagent Systems (AAMAS 2018), July 2018
Endriss, U., Grandi, U., Porello, D.: Complexity of judgment aggregation. J. Artif. Intell. Res. (JAIR) 45, 481–514 (2012)
Grandi, U., Endriss, U.: Lifting integrity constraints in binary aggregation. Artif. Intell. 199–200, 45–66 (2013)
Grossi, D., Modgil, S.: On the graded acceptability of arguments in abstract and instantiated argumentation. Artif. Intell. 275, 138–173 (2019)
Grossi, D., Pigozzi, G.: Judgment Aggregation: A Primer. Synthesis Lectures on Artificial Intelligence and Machine Learning. Morgan & Claypool Publishers, San Rafael (2014)
List, C., Pettit, P.: Aggregating sets of judgments: an impossibility result. Econ. Philos. 18(1), 89–110 (2002)
Marquis, P.: Consequence finding algorithms. In: Kohlas, J., Moral, S. (eds.) Handbook of Defeasible Reasoning and Uncertainty Management Systems, vol. 5, pp. 41–145. Springer, Dordrecht (2000). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-017-1737-3_3
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), IFAAMAS (2010)
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2020 Springer Nature Switzerland AG
About this paper
Cite this paper
Chen, W. (2020). Preservation of Admissibility with Rationality and Feasibility Constraints. In: Dastani, M., Dong, H., van der Torre, L. (eds) Logic and Argumentation. CLAR 2020. Lecture Notes in Computer Science(), vol 12061. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-44638-3_15
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-44638-3_15
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-030-44637-6
Online ISBN: 978-3-030-44638-3
eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)