Comparison Criteria for Argumentation Semantics

Sylvie Doutre (1, 2) , Jean-Guy Mailly (3)

1 IRIT-LILaC - Logique, Interaction, Langue et Calcul
2 UT Capitole - Université Toulouse Capitole
3 LIPADE - EA 2517 - Laboratoire d'Informatique Paris Descartes

Argumentation reasoning is a way for agents to evaluate a situation. Given a framework made of conflicting arguments, a semantics allows to evaluate the acceptability of the arguments. It may happen that the semantics associated to the framework has to be changed. In order to perform the most suitable change, the current and a potential new semantics have to be compared. Notions of difference measures between semantics have already been proposed, and application cases where they have to be minimized when a change of semantics has to be performed, have been highlighted. This paper develops these notions, it proposes an additional kind of difference measure, and shows application cases where measures may have to be maximized, and combined.

Mots clés: Argumentation reasoning; Semantics

Domaines: Intelligence artificielle [cs.AI]; Système multi-agents [cs.MA]

Sylvie Doutre, Jean-Guy Mailly. Comparison Criteria for Argumentation Semantics. EUMAS 2017. 15th European Conference on Multi-Agent Systems, Dec 2017, Evry, France. pp.219-234. ⟨hal-02649413⟩