论文标题
以索赔为中心的观点中抽象论证中偏好的影响
The Effect of Preferences in Abstract Argumentation Under a Claim-Centric View
论文作者
论文摘要
在本文中，我们研究了以索赔为中心的观点中抽象论证中偏好的影响。最近的工作表明，当对索赔级而不是参数级别执行推理时，语义和计算属性可能会发生变化，而在某些自然限制下（具有相同索赔的参数具有相同的传出攻击），这些属性是保留的。现在，当必须考虑偏好并考虑四个突出的减少以处理参数之间的偏好时，我们将研究这些效果。正如我们将看到的那样，这些减少产生了不同类别的主张论证框架，并且在语义属性和计算复杂性方面的行为不同。这加强了这样一种观点，即必须谨慎处理处理偏好的实际选择。
In this paper, we study the effect of preferences in abstract argumentation under a claim-centric perspective. Recent work has revealed that semantical and computational properties can change when reasoning is performed on claim-level rather than on the argument-level, while under certain natural restrictions (arguments with the same claims have the same outgoing attacks) these properties are conserved. We now investigate these effects when, in addition, preferences have to be taken into account and consider four prominent reductions to handle preferences between arguments. As we shall see, these reductions give rise to different classes of claim-augmented argumentation frameworks, and behave differently in terms of semantic properties and computational complexity. This strengthens the view that the actual choice for handling preferences has to be taken with care.
