Neuro-Argumentative Learning with Case-Based Reasoning
We introduce Gradual Abstract Argumentation for Case-Based Reasoning (Gradual AA-CBR), a data-driven, neurosymbolic classification model in which the outcome is determined by an argumentation debate structure that is learned simultaneously with neural-based feature extractors. Each argument in the debate is an observed case from the training data, favouring their labelling. Cases attack or support those with opposing or agreeing labellings, with the strength of each argument and relationship learned through gradient-based methods. This argumentation debate structure provides human-aligned reasoning, improving model interpretability compared to traditional neural networks (NNs). Unlike the existing purely symbolic variant, Abstract Argumentation for Case-Based Reasoning (AA-CBR), Gradual AA-CBR is capable of multi-class classification, automatic learning of feature and data point importance, assigning uncertainty values to outcomes, using all available data points, and does not require binary features. We show that Gradual AA-CBR performs comparably to NNs whilst significantly outperforming existing AA-CBR formulations.
Code (1)
Tasks
Abstract ArgumentationMulti-class ClassificationSimilar Papers 제목 키워드 기반
Neurosymbolic Learning for Inference-Time Argumentation
Claim verification is an important problem in high-stakes settings, including health and finance. When information underpinning claims is incomplete or conflicting, uncertain answers may be more appropriate than binary t…
Argumentative Reward Learning: Reasoning About Human Preferences
We define a novel neuro-symbolic framework, argumentative reward learning, which combines preference-based argumentation with existing approaches to reinforcement learning from human feedback. Our method improves prior w…
reinforcement-learningReinforcement LearningReinforcement Learning (RL)An Argumentative Explanation Framework for Generalized Reason Model with Inconsistent Precedents
Precedential constraint is one foundation of case-based reasoning in AI and Law. It generally assumes that the underlying set of precedents must be consistent. To relax this assumption, a generalized notion of the reason…
Deep Arguing
Deep learning has become the dominant approach for creating high capacity, scalable models across diverse data modalities. However, because these models rely on a large number of learned parameters, tightly couple featur…
Adaptive Collaboration of Arena-Based Argumentative LLMs for Explainable and Contestable Legal Reasoning
Legal reasoning requires not only high accuracy but also the ability to justify decisions through verifiable and contestable arguments. However, existing Large Language Model (LLM) approaches, such as Chain-of-Thought (C…
Legal Reasoning