Aggregation in Value-Based Argumentation Frameworks

Grzegorz Lisowski (1) , Sylvie Doutre (2, 3) , Umberto Grandi (2, 3)

1 University of Warwick [Coventry]
2 IRIT-LILaC - Logique, Interaction, Langue et Calcul
3 UT Capitole - Université Toulouse Capitole

Value-based argumentation enhances a classical abstract argumentation graph - in which arguments are modelled as nodes connected by directed arrows called attacks - with labels on arguments, called values, and an ordering on values, called audience, to provide a more fine-grained justification of the attack relation. With more than one agent facing such an argumentation problem, agents may differ in their ranking of values. When needing to reach a collective view, such agents face a dilemma between two equally justifiable approaches: aggregating their views at the level of values, or aggregating their attack relations, remaining therefore at the level of the graphs. We explore the strengths and limitations of both approaches, employing techniques from preference aggregation and graph aggregation, and propose a third possibility aggregating rankings extracted from given attack relations.

Mots clés: Argumentation graph

Domaines: Intelligence artificielle [cs.AI]; Logique en informatique [cs.LO]; Système multi-agents [cs.MA]

Grzegorz Lisowski, Sylvie Doutre, Umberto Grandi. Aggregation in Value-Based Argumentation Frameworks. 17th Conference on Theoretical Aspects of Rationality and Knowledge (TARK 2019), Jul 2019, Toulouse, France. pp.313-331. ⟨hal-02421556⟩