Journal
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF APPROXIMATE REASONING
Volume 105, Issue -, Pages 252-286Publisher
ELSEVIER SCIENCE INC
DOI: 10.1016/j.ijar.2018.11.019
Keywords
Bipolar argumentation; Quantitative argumentation
Categories
Funding
- University of Brescia under the WAT_CHALLENGE project
- EPSRC [EP/P029558/1 ROAD2H]
- EPSRC [EP/P029558/1] Funding Source: UKRI
Ask authors/readers for more resources
The study of properties of gradual evaluation methods in argumentation has received increasing attention in recent years, with studies devoted to various classes of frameworks/ methods leading to conceptually similar but formally distinct properties in different contexts. In this paper we provide a novel systematic analysis for this research landscape by making three main contributions. First, we identify groups of conceptually related properties in the literature, which can be regarded as based on common patterns and, using these patterns, we evidence that many further novel properties can be considered. Then, we provide a simplifying and unifying perspective for these groups of properties by showing that they are all implied by novel parametric principles of (either strict or nonstrict) balance and monotonicity. Finally, we show that (instances of) these principles (and thus the group, literature and novel properties that they imply) are satisfied by several quantitative argumentation formalisms in the literature, thus confirming the principles' general validity and utility to support a compact, yet comprehensive, analysis of properties of gradual argumentation. (C) 2018 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
Authors
I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.
Reviews
Recommended
No Data Available