An axiomatic account of preference-based argumentation systems - Université d'Artois Access content directly
Conference Papers Year : 2009

An axiomatic account of preference-based argumentation systems


Argumentation is a reasoning model based on the construction and evaluation of arguments. Dung has proposed an abstract argumentation framework in which arguments are assumed to have the same strength. This assumption is unfortunately not realistic. Consequently, three main extensions of the framework have been proposed in the literature. The basic idea is that if an argument is stronger than its attacker, the attack fails. The aim of the paper is twofold : First, it shows that the three extensions of Dung framework may lead to uninten- ded results. Second, it proposes a new approach that takes into account the strengths of arguments, and that ensures sound results. We start by presenting two minimal requirements that any preference-based argumentation framework should satisfy, namely the conflict-freeness of arguments extensions and the generalization of Dung’s framework. Inspired from works on handling inconsistency in knowledge bases, the proposed approach defines a binary relation on the powerset of arguments. The maximal elements of this relation represent the extensions of the new framework.
Fichier principal
Vignette du fichier
VesicAmgoud.pdf (191.98 Ko) Télécharger le fichier
Origin : Files produced by the author(s)

Dates and versions

hal-03301296 , version 1 (21-02-2023)


  • HAL Id : hal-03301296 , version 1


Leila Amgoud, Srdjan Vesic. An axiomatic account of preference-based argumentation systems. 5èmes Journées francophones sur les Modèles Formels de l'Interaction (MFI 2009), Jun 2009, Lannion, France. ⟨hal-03301296⟩
23 View
3 Download


Gmail Facebook Twitter LinkedIn More