Abstract: The paper considers the problem of in what circumstances an aggregation rule guarantees an admissible output extension that represents a good compromise between several input extensions of abstract argumentation framework, each provided by a different individual. To achieve this, we introduce the concept of concrete admissibility for abstract argumentations by strengthening Dung’s admissibility. We also define a model for extension aggregation that clearly separates the constraint supposed to be satisfied by individuals and the constraint that must be met by the collective decision. Using this model, we show that the majority rule guarantees admissible sets on newly defined admissible sets.
Loading