Abstract The paper develops a formal theory of the degree of justification of arguments, which relies solely on the structure of an argumentation framework, and which can be successfully interfaced with approaches to instantiated argumentation. The theory is developed in three steps. First, the paper introduces a graded generalization of the two key notions underpinning Dung's semantics: self-defense and conflict-freeness. This leads to a natural generalization of Dung's semantics, whereby standard extensions are weakened or strengthened depending on the level of self-defense and conflict-freeness they meet. The paper investigates the fixpoint theory of these semantics, establishing existence results for them. Second, the paper shows how graded semantics readily provide an approach to argument rankings, offering a novel contribution to the recently growing research programme on ranking-based semantics. Third, this novel approach to argument ranking is applied and studied in the context of instantiated argumentation frameworks, and in so doing is shown to account for a simple form of accrual of arguments within the Dung paradigm. Finally, the theory is compared in detail with existing approaches.
In what follows, we refer to absolute graded rankings @math (Definition ), which are the more naturally comparable with the other existing approaches to graduality. Unless stated otherwise, we assume @math stands for any of the semantics in @math . Moreover, we assume the constraint @math and @math . Albeit not essential for the comparison, this assumption streamlines some of the proofs in this section. We now turn to the properties studied in @cite_3 , and discuss whether our approach satisfies each of them. In doing so we will recall which approaches satisfy each property (writing if satisfied by all, and if satisfied by none).
@cite_3
2949393806
We show a new way to round vector solutions of semidefinite programming (SDP) hierarchies into integral solutions, based on a connection between these hierarchies and the spectrum of the input graph. We demonstrate the utility of our method by providing a new SDP-hierarchy based algorithm for constraint satisfaction problems with 2-variable constraints (2-CSP's). More concretely, we show for every 2-CSP instance I a rounding algorithm for r rounds of the Lasserre SDP hierarchy for I that obtains an integral solution that is at most worse than the relaxation's value (normalized to lie in [0,1]), as long as r > k ( ) ( ) ;, where k is the alphabet size of I, @math , and @math denotes the number of eigenvalues larger than @math in the normalized adjacency matrix of the constraint graph of @math . In the case that @math is a instance, the threshold @math is only a polynomial in @math , and is independent of the alphabet size. Also in this case, we can give a non-trivial bound on the number of rounds for instance. In particular our result yields an SDP-hierarchy based algorithm that matches the performance of the recent subexponential algorithm of Arora, Barak and Steurer (FOCS 2010) in the worst case, but runs faster on a natural family of instances, thus further restricting the set of possible hard instances for Khot's Unique Games Conjecture. Our algorithm actually requires less than the @math constraints specified by the @math level of the Lasserre hierarchy, and in some cases @math rounds of our program can be evaluated in time @math .