Leila Amgoud, Elise Bonzon, Marco Correia et al.
Social abstract argumentation is a principled way to assign values to conflicting (weighted) arguments. In this note we discuss the important property of the uniqueness of the model.
Elise Bonzon, Jérôme Delobelle, Sébastien Konieczny et al.
Argumentation is a process of evaluating and comparing a set of arguments. A way to compare them consists in using a ranking-based semantics which rank-order arguments from the most to the least acceptable ones. Recently, a number of such semantics have been proposed independently, often associated with some desirable properties. However, there is no comparative study which takes a broader perspective. This is what we propose in this work. We provide a general comparison of all these semantics with respect to the proposed properties. That allows to underline the differences of behavior between the existing semantics.