Strength Change Explanations in Quantitative Argumentation
In order to make argumentation-based inference contestable, it is crucial to explain what changes can achieve a desired (instead of the contested) inference result. To this end, we introduce strength change explanations for quantitative (bipolar) argumentation graphs. Strength change explanations describe changes to the initial strengths of a subset of the arguments in a given graph that can achieve a desired ordering based on the final strengths of some (potentially different) subset of arguments. We show that the existing notions of inverse and counterfactual problems can be reduced to strength change explanations. We also prove basic soundness and completeness properties of our strength change explanations, and demonstrate their existence and non-existence in some special cases. By applying a heuristic search, we demonstrate that we can often successfully find strength change explanations for layered graphs that are common in typical application scenarios; still, limitations remain for settings where we do not provide guarantees for the presence (or absence) of explanations.
Code (0)
등록된 구현이 없습니다.
Similar Papers 제목 키워드 기반
Change in Quantitative Bipolar Argumentation: Sufficient, Necessary, and Counterfactual Explanations
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 …
CE-QArg: Counterfactual Explanations for Quantitative Bipolar Argumentation Frameworks (Technical Report)
There is a growing interest in understanding arguments' strength in Quantitative Bipolar Argumentation Frameworks (QBAFs). Most existing studies focus on attribution-based methods that explain an argument's strength by a…
counterfactualvalidContestability in Quantitative Argumentation
Contestable AI requires that AI-driven decisions align with human preferences. While various forms of argumentation have been shown to support contestability, Edge-Weighted Quantitative Bipolar Argumentation Frameworks (…
Applying Attribution Explanations in Truth-Discovery Quantitative Bipolar Argumentation Frameworks
Explaining the strength of arguments under gradual semantics is receiving increasing attention. For example, various studies in the literature offer explanations by computing the attribution scores of arguments or edges …
Explaining Arguments' Strength: Unveiling the Role of Attacks and Supports (Technical Report)
Quantitatively explaining the strength of arguments under gradual semantics has recently received increasing attention. Specifically, several works in the literature provide quantitative explanations by computing the att…
Fraud Detection