14 citations · 29 across the 11 of their papers we have counts for
11 papers
On the Existence of an Inverse Solution for Preference-Based Reductions in Argumentation
Alessio Zaninotto, Bruno Yun, Nir Oren +1
Preference-based argumentation frameworks (PAFs) extend Dung's approach to abstract argumentation (AAFs) by encoding preferences over arguments. Such preferences control the transf…
Rejecting Arguments Based on Doubt in Structured Bipolar Argumentation
Michael A. Müller, Srdjan Vesic, Bruno Yun
This paper develops a new approach to computational argumentation that is informed by philosophical and linguistic views. Namely, it takes into account two ideas that have received…
Can LLMs Judge Debates? Evaluating Non-Linear Reasoning via Argumentation Theory Semantics
Reza Sanayei, Srdjan Vesic, Eduardo Blanco +1
Large Language Models (LLMs) excel at linear reasoning tasks but remain underexplored on non-linear structures such as those found in natural debates, which are best expressed as a…
Impact Measures for Gradual Argumentation Semantics
Caren Al Anaissy, Jérôme Delobelle, Srdjan Vesic +1
Argumentation is a formalism allowing to reason with contradictory information by modeling arguments and their interactions. There are now an increasing number of gradual semantics…
The Inverse Problem for Argumentation Gradual Semantics
Nir Oren, Bruno Yun, Srdjan Vesic +1
Gradual semantics with abstract argumentation provide each argument with a score reflecting its acceptability, i.e. how "much" it is attacked by other arguments. Many different gra…
Dung's semantics satisfy attack removal monotonicity
Leila Amgoud, Srdjan Vesic
We show that preferred, stable, complete, and grounded semantics satisfy attack removal monotonicity. This means that if an attack from b to a is removed, the status of a cannot wo…