Argumentation games for admissibility and cogency criteria

BODANZA, GUSTAVO ADRIÁN; TOHMÉ, FERNANDO ABEL; SIMARI, GUILLERMO R.

Computational Models of Argument

IOS Press

Lugar: Amsterdam-Berlin-Toki-Washington, DC; Año: 2012; p. 153 - 164

In this work, we develop a game-theoretic framework in which pro and con arguments are put forward. This framework intends to capture winning strategies for different defense criteria. In turn, each possible extension semantics satisfies a particular defense criterion. To ensure that only semantics satisfying given criteria are obtained, protocols for playing have to be defined, being the ensuing winning strategies full characterizations of the corresponding criteria. Admissibility and strong admissibility are two of those criteria proposed in the literature for the evaluation of extension semantics; here, we also introduce two weaker criteria, pairwise and weak cogency, for the evaluation of non-admissible semantics, and we define specific game protocols capturing them.