Change in quantitative bipolar argumentation: sufficient, necessary, and counterfactual explanations

DOI10.1016/j.ijar.2023.109066MaRDI QIDQ6570290zbMATH OpenFDO

Authors Timotheus Kampik, Kristijonas Čyras, José Ruiz Alarcón

Publication date 10 July 2024

Published in International Journal of Approximate Reasoning (Search for Journal in Brave)

Full work available at URL https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijar.2023.109066

zbMATH Keywords

explainable AIformal methodsquantitative argumentation

Mathematics Subject Classification ID

Reasoning under uncertainty in the context of artificial intelligence (68T37)

Recommendations

• Explanations of non-monotonic inference in admissibility-based abstract argumentation
• Minimality, necessity and sufficiency for argumentation and explanation
• Necessary and sufficient explanations for argumentation-based conclusions
• scientific article; zbMATH DE number 6292806
• Explaining updates by minimal sums

Cites work

• Abduction and dialogical proof in argumentation and logic programming
• Abduction in argumentation frameworks
• Argumentation in artificial intelligence
• Change in abstract argumentation frameworks: adding an argument
• Counterfactuals
• Dialectic proof procedures for assumption-based, admissible argumentation
• Explaining non-acceptability in abstract argumentation
• Explanations of non-monotonic inference in admissibility-based abstract argumentation
• From fine-grained properties to broad principles for gradual argumentation: a principled spectrum
• scientific article; zbMATH DE number 6934384 (Why is no real title available?)
• Inferring from inconsistency in preference-based argumentation frameworks
• Interpretability of gradual semantics in abstract argumentation
• Necessary and sufficient explanations for argumentation-based conclusions
• On explanations for non-acceptable arguments
• On the acceptability of arguments and its fundamental role in nonmonotonic reasoning, logic programming and n-person games
• Polynomial calculation of the Shapley value based on sampling

Cited in

(2)

• Minimality, necessity and sufficiency for argumentation and explanation
• Contribution functions for quantitative bipolar argumentation graphs: a principle-based analysis

This page was built for publication: Change in quantitative bipolar argumentation: sufficient, necessary, and counterfactual explanations

Report a bug (only for logged in users!)Click here to report a bug for this page (MaRDI item Q6570290)