Change in Quantitative Bipolar Argumentation: Sufficient, Necessary, and Counterfactual Explanations
Fuente:
arXiv
Saved in:
| Main Authors: | , , |
|---|---|
| Format: | Preprint |
| Published: |
2025
|
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: | |
| Tags: |
Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
|
| _version_ | 1866909800106819584 |
|---|---|
| author | Kampik, Timotheus Čyras, Kristijonas Alarcón, José Ruiz |
| author_facet | Kampik, Timotheus Čyras, Kristijonas Alarcón, José Ruiz |
| contents | This paper presents a formal approach to explaining change of inference in Quantitative Bipolar Argumentation Frameworks (QBAFs). When drawing conclusions from a QBAF and updating the QBAF to then again draw conclusions (and so on), our approach traces changes -- which we call strength inconsistencies -- in the partial order over argument strengths that a semantics establishes on some arguments of interest, called topic arguments. We trace the causes of strength inconsistencies to specific arguments, which then serve as explanations. We identify sufficient, necessary, and counterfactual explanations for strength inconsistencies and show that strength inconsistency explanations exist if and only if an update leads to strength inconsistency. We define a heuristic-based approach to facilitate the search for strength inconsistency explanations, for which we also provide an implementation. |
| format | Preprint |
| id |
arxiv_https___arxiv_org_abs_2509_18215 |
| institution | arXiv |
| publishDate | 2025 |
| record_format | arxiv |
| spellingShingle | Change in Quantitative Bipolar Argumentation: Sufficient, Necessary, and Counterfactual Explanations Kampik, Timotheus Čyras, Kristijonas Alarcón, José Ruiz Artificial Intelligence Logic in Computer Science Multiagent Systems This paper presents a formal approach to explaining change of inference in Quantitative Bipolar Argumentation Frameworks (QBAFs). When drawing conclusions from a QBAF and updating the QBAF to then again draw conclusions (and so on), our approach traces changes -- which we call strength inconsistencies -- in the partial order over argument strengths that a semantics establishes on some arguments of interest, called topic arguments. We trace the causes of strength inconsistencies to specific arguments, which then serve as explanations. We identify sufficient, necessary, and counterfactual explanations for strength inconsistencies and show that strength inconsistency explanations exist if and only if an update leads to strength inconsistency. We define a heuristic-based approach to facilitate the search for strength inconsistency explanations, for which we also provide an implementation. |
| title | Change in Quantitative Bipolar Argumentation: Sufficient, Necessary, and Counterfactual Explanations |
| topic | Artificial Intelligence Logic in Computer Science Multiagent Systems |
| url | https://arxiv.org/abs/2509.18215 |