Comparing argumentation semantics with respect to skepticism

P. Baroni, M. Giacomin

Proc. of ECSQARU 2007, 9th European Conference on Symbolic and Quantitative Approaches to Reasoning with Uncertainty, Hammamet, Tunisia, 2007, 210-221



The issue of formalizing skepticism relations between argumentation semantics has been considered only recently in the literature. In this paper, we contribute to this kind of analysis by providing a systematic comparison of a significant set of literature semantics (namely grounded, complete, preferred, stable, semi-stable, ideal, prudent, and CF2 semantics) using both a weak and a strong skepticism relation.

Publisher's on-line resources

Return to publication list