Empirical study on human evaluation of complex argumentation frameworks

DOI10.1007/978-3-030-19570-0_7MaRDI QIDQ2296700zbMATH OpenOpenAlexFDO

Authors Marcos Cramer, Mathieu Guillaume

Publication date 18 February 2020

Full work available at URL https://arxiv.org/abs/1902.10552

zbMATH Keywords

abstract argumentationargumentation semanticsempirical cognitive study

Mathematics Subject Classification ID

Logic in artificial intelligence (68T27)

Recommendations

• Computing the grounded semantics in all the subgraphs of an argumentation framework: an empirical evaluation
• Partial semantics of argumentation: basic properties and empirical
• On principle-based evaluation of extension-based argumentation semantics
• Complexity-sensitive decision procedures for abstract argumentation
• The cf2 argumentation semantics revisited

Cited in

(6)

• The choice-preferred semantics for relevance-oriented acceptance of admissible sets of arguments
• Explanations of non-monotonic inference in admissibility-based abstract argumentation
• Logic Programming, Argumentation and Human Reasoning
• Paracoherent answer set semantics meets argumentation frameworks
• On the decomposition of abstract dialectical frameworks and the complexity of naive-based semantics
• The complexity landscape of claim-augmented argumentation frameworks

This page was built for publication: Empirical study on human evaluation of complex argumentation frameworks

Report a bug (only for logged in users!)Click here to report a bug for this page (MaRDI item Q2296700)