Non-Admissibility in Abstract Argumentation

Wolfgang Dvorák*, Tjitze Rienstra, Leendert van der Torre, Stefan Woltran

*Corresponding author for this work

Research output: Chapter in Book/Report/Conference proceedingChapterAcademic


In this paper, we give an overview of several recent proposals for non-Admissible non-naive semantics for abstract argumentation frameworks. We highlight the similarities and differences between weak admissibility-based approaches and undecidedness-blocking approaches using examples and principles as well as a study of their computational complexity. We introduce a kind of strengthened undecidedness-blocking semantics combining some of the distinctive behaviours of weak admissibility-based semantics with the lower complexity of undecidedness-blocking approaches. We call it loop semantics, because in our new semantics, an argument can only be undecided if it is part of a loop of undecided arguments. Our paper shows how a principle-based approach and a complexity-based approach can be used in tandem to further develop the foundations of formal argumentation.

Original languageEnglish
Title of host publicationComputational Models of Argument
EditorsFransesca Toni, Sylwia Polberg, Richard Booth, Martin Caminada, Hiroyuki Kido
Publication statusPublished - 2022
EventComputational Models of Argument - Cardiff University, Cardiff, United Kingdom
Duration: 14 Sept 202216 Sept 2022,University%20in%20Wales%2C%20United%20Kingdom.&text=In%20addition%20to%20the%20main,on%20current%20topics%20of%20argumentation.

Publication series

SeriesFrontiers in Artificial Intelligence and Applications


ConferenceComputational Models of Argument
Abbreviated titleCOMMA 2022
Country/TerritoryUnited Kingdom
Internet address


Dive into the research topics of 'Non-Admissibility in Abstract Argumentation'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this