Stratified Labelings for Abstract Argumentation
This work addresses a specific issue in computational argumentation for researchers, offering an incremental improvement over existing methods.
The paper tackles the problem of assessing argument controversiality in abstract argumentation frameworks by introducing stratified labelings, which use ranks instead of standard labels to provide a more fine-grained evaluation.
We introduce stratified labelings as a novel semantical approach to abstract argumentation frameworks. Compared to standard labelings, stratified labelings provide a more fine-grained assessment of the controversiality of arguments using ranks instead of the usual labels in, out, and undecided. We relate the framework of stratified labelings to conditional logic and, in particular, to the System Z ranking functions.