Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Extending Social Abstract Argumentation with Votes on Attacks

  • Conference paper
Theory and Applications of Formal Argumentation (TAFA 2013)

Part of the book series: Lecture Notes in Computer Science ((LNAI,volume 8306))

Abstract

Social abstract argumentation laid theoretical foundations for future online debating systems with formal backbones and semantics. The advantage of these envisioned new systems is their capability of formally justifying the social outcomes of their debates. Many recent extensions proposed for argumentation in general have addressed the issue that not all attacks between arguments are equal, especially in the eyes of the crowd. This work generalises social abstract argumentation to incorporate voting on attacks, inducing a social notion of attack strengths.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 39.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 54.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Amgoud, L., et al.: On bipolarity in argumentation frameworks. Int. J. Intell. Syst. 23(10), 1062–1093 (2008)

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  2. Baroni, P., Giacomin, M.: On principle-based evaluation of extension-based argumentation semantics. Artif. Intell. 171(10-15), 675–700 (2007)

    Article  MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  3. Boella, G., et al.: Support in abstract argumentation. In: Procs. of COMMA 2010. FAIA, vol. 216. IOS Press (2010)

    Google Scholar 

  4. Cabrio, E., Villata, S.: Natural language arguments: A combined approach. In: Procs. of ECAI 2012. FAIA, vol. 242. IOS Press (2012)

    Google Scholar 

  5. Cayrol, C., Lagasquie-Schiex, M.C.: Graduality in argumentation. J. Artif. Intell. Res. 23, 245–297 (2005)

    MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  6. Chesñevar, C., et al.: Towards an argument interchange format. Knowledge Eng. Review 21(4), 293–316 (2006)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. 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)

    Article  MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  8. Dunne, P., et al.: Weighted argument systems: Basic definitions, algorithms, and complexity results. Artif. Intell. 175(2), 457–486 (2011)

    Article  MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  9. Evripidou, V., Toni, F.: Argumentation and voting for an intelligent user empowering business directory on the web. In: Krötzsch, M., Straccia, U. (eds.) RR 2012. LNCS, vol. 7497, pp. 209–212. Springer, Heidelberg (2012)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  10. Gabbay, D.M.: Equational approach to argumentation networks. Argument & Computation 3(2-3), 87–142 (2012)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Gabbay, D., Rodrigues, O.: A numerical approach to the merging of argumentation networks. In: Fisher, M., van der Torre, L., Dastani, M., Governatori, G. (eds.) CLIMA XIII 2012. LNCS (LNAI), vol. 7486, pp. 195–212. Springer, Heidelberg (2012)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  12. Gabbriellini, S., Torroni, P.: Large scale agreements via microdebates. In: Procs. of AT 2012. CEUR Workshop Proceedings, vol. 918 (2012)

    Google Scholar 

  13. García, A., Dix, J., Simari, G.: Argument-based logic programming. In: Rahwan, I., Simari, G.R. (eds.) Argumentation in Artificial Intelligence, pp. 153–171. Springer (2009)

    Google Scholar 

  14. Grosse, K., Chesñevar, C.I., Maguitman, A.G.: An argument-based approach to mining opinions from Twitter. In: Procs. of AT 2012. CEUR Workshop Proceedings, vol. 918 (2012)

    Google Scholar 

  15. Kontarinis, D., et al.: Picking the right expert to make a debate uncontroversial. In: Procs. of COMMA 2012. FAIA, vol. 245. IOS Press (2012)

    Google Scholar 

  16. Leite, J., Martins, J.: Social abstract argumentation. In: Procs. of IJCAI 2011. IJCAI/AAAI (2011)

    Google Scholar 

  17. Modgil, S.: Reasoning about preferences in argumentation frameworks. Artif. Intell. 173(9-10), 901–934 (2009)

    Article  MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  18. Modgil, S., et al.: The added value of argumentation. In: Ossowski, S. (ed.) Agreement Technologies. Law, Governance and Tech. Series, vol. 8, pp. 357–403. Springer (2013)

    Google Scholar 

  19. Modgil, S., Prakken, H.: Resolutions in structured argumentation. In: Procs. of COMMA 2012. FAIA, vol. 245, IOS Press (2012)

    Google Scholar 

  20. Oren, N., Atkinson, K., Li, H.: Group persuasion through uncertain audience modelling. In: Procs. of COMMA 2012. FAIA, vol. 245. IOS Press (2012)

    Google Scholar 

  21. Walton, D.: Argumentation theory: A very short introduction. In: Rahwan, I., Simari, G.R. (eds.) Argumentation in Artificial Intelligence, pp. 1–22. Springer (2009)

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. CENTRIA and Departamento de Informática, FCT, Universidade Nova de Lisboa, Portugal

    Sinan Eğilmez, João Martins & João Leite

  2. Computer Science Department, Carnegie Mellon University, Pittsburgh, PA, USA

    João Martins

Authors
  1. Sinan Eğilmez
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. João Martins
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. João Leite
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Informatics, King’s College London, Strand, WC2R 2LS, London, UK

    Elizabeth Black

  2. King’s College London, Strand, WC2R 2LS, London, UK

    Sanjay Modgil

  3. Department of Computing Science, University of Aberdeen, AB24 3UE, Aberdeen, UK

    Nir Oren

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2014 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg

About this paper

Cite this paper

Eğilmez, S., Martins, J., Leite, J. (2014). Extending Social Abstract Argumentation with Votes on Attacks. In: Black, E., Modgil, S., Oren, N. (eds) Theory and Applications of Formal Argumentation. TAFA 2013. Lecture Notes in Computer Science(), vol 8306. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-54373-9_2

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-54373-9_2

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-642-54372-2

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-642-54373-9

  • eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation