{"status":"ok","message-type":"work","message-version":"1.0.0","message":{"indexed":{"date-parts":[[2026,1,15]],"date-time":"2026-01-15T13:14:50Z","timestamp":1768482890039,"version":"3.49.0"},"reference-count":58,"publisher":"Maximum Academic Press","issue":"5","license":[{"start":{"date-parts":[[2013,9,5]],"date-time":"2013-09-05T00:00:00Z","timestamp":1378339200000},"content-version":"unspecified","delay-in-days":0,"URL":"https:\/\/www.cambridge.org\/core\/terms"}],"content-domain":{"domain":[],"crossmark-restriction":false},"short-container-title":["The Knowledge Engineering Review"],"published-print":{"date-parts":[[2014,11]]},"abstract":"<jats:title>Abstract<\/jats:title>\n                  <jats:p>In the last decades, most works in the literature have been devoted to study argumentation formalisms that focus on a defeat relation among arguments. Recently, the study of a support relation between arguments regained attention among researchers; the bulk of the research has been centered on the study of support within the context of abstract argumentation by considering support as an explicit interaction between arguments. However, there exist other approaches that take support into account in a different setting. This article surveys several interpretations of the notion of support as proposed in the literature, such as deductive support, necessary support, evidential support, subargument, and backing, among others. The aim is to provide a comprehensive study where similarities and differences among these interpretations are highlighted, as well as discuss how they are addressed by different argumentation formalisms.<\/jats:p>","DOI":"10.1017\/s0269888913000325","type":"journal-article","created":{"date-parts":[[2013,9,11]],"date-time":"2013-09-11T08:52:04Z","timestamp":1378889524000},"page":"513-550","source":"Crossref","is-referenced-by-count":44,"title":["A survey of different approaches to support in argumentation systems"],"prefix":"10.48130","volume":"29","author":[{"given":"Andrea","family":"Cohen","sequence":"first","affiliation":[],"role":[{"role":"author","vocabulary":"crossref"}]},{"given":"Sebastian","family":"Gottifredi","sequence":"additional","affiliation":[],"role":[{"role":"author","vocabulary":"crossref"}]},{"given":"Alejandro J.","family":"Garc\u00eda","sequence":"additional","affiliation":[],"role":[{"role":"author","vocabulary":"crossref"}]},{"given":"Guillermo R.","family":"Simari","sequence":"additional","affiliation":[],"role":[{"role":"author","vocabulary":"crossref"}]}],"member":"27968","published-online":{"date-parts":[[2013,9,5]]},"reference":[{"key":"S0269888913000325_ref58","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1007\/978-0-387-98197-0_11"},{"key":"S0269888913000325_ref57","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1007\/s10503-005-4421-z"},{"key":"S0269888913000325_ref55","unstructured":"Verheij B. 2002. On the existence and multiplicity of extensions in dialectical argumentation. In 9th International Workshop on Non-Monotonic Reasoning, Toulouse, France, 416\u2013425."},{"key":"S0269888913000325_ref54","unstructured":"Verheij B. 1996. Rules, Reasons, Arguments. Formal Studies of argumentation and defeat. PhD thesis, Universiteit Maastricht."},{"key":"S0269888913000325_ref53","volume-title":"The Uses of Argument","author":"Toulmin","year":"1958"},{"key":"S0269888913000325_ref51","unstructured":"Rotstein N. D. , Moguillansky M. O. , Garc\u00eda A. J. , Simari G. R. 2010. A dynamic argumentation framework. In 3rd International Conference on Computational Models of Argument, Desenzano del Garda, Italy, 427\u2013438."},{"key":"S0269888913000325_ref49","volume-title":"Argumentation in Artificial Intelligence","author":"Rahwan","year":"2009"},{"key":"S0269888913000325_ref45","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1080\/11663081.1997.10510900"},{"key":"S0269888913000325_ref48","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1080\/19462160903564592"},{"key":"S0269888913000325_ref41","unstructured":"Oren N. , Norman T. J. 2008. Semantics for evidence-based argumentation. In 2nd International Conference on Computational Models of Argument, Toulouse, France, 276\u2013284."},{"key":"S0269888913000325_ref40","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","unstructured":"Nouioua F. , Risch V. 2011. Argumentation frameworks with necessities. In 5th International Conference on Scalable Uncertainty Management, Dayton, Ohio, USA, 163\u2013176.","DOI":"10.1007\/978-3-642-23963-2_14"},{"key":"S0269888913000325_ref38","unstructured":"Nielsen S. H. , Parsons S. 2006. A generalization of Dung's abstract framework for argumentation: arguing with sets of attacking arguments. In Third International Workshop on Argumentation in Multi-Agent Systems, Hakodate, Japan, 54\u201373."},{"key":"S0269888913000325_ref35","unstructured":"Mart\u00ednez D. C. , Garc\u00eda A. J. , Simari G. R. 2008b. An abstract argumentation framework with varied-strength attacks. In 11th International Conference on Principles of Knowledge Representation and Reasoning, Sydney, NSW, Australia, 135\u2013144."},{"key":"S0269888913000325_ref36","unstructured":"Mart\u00ednez D. C. , Garc\u00eda A. J. , Simari G. R. 2008a. Strong and weak forms of abstract argument defense. In 2nd International Conference on Computational Models of Argument, Toulouse, France, 216\u2013227."},{"key":"S0269888913000325_ref34","unstructured":"Mart\u00ednez D. C. , Garc\u00eda A. J. , Simari G. R. 2007. Modelling well-structured argumentation lines. In 20th International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence, Hyderabad, India, 465\u2013470."},{"key":"S0269888913000325_ref31","unstructured":"Gelfond M. , Lifschitz V. 1988. The stable model semantics for logic programming. In ICLP\/SLP, Seattle, Washington, USA, 1070\u20131080."},{"key":"S0269888913000325_ref30","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1017\/S1471068403001674"},{"key":"S0269888913000325_ref29","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1016\/0004-3702(94)00041-X"},{"key":"S0269888913000325_ref27","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"385","DOI":"10.1613\/jair.2520","article-title":"On the qualitative comparison of decisions having positive and negative features","volume":"32","author":"Dubois","year":"2008","journal-title":"Journal of Artificial Intellicence Research"},{"key":"S0269888913000325_ref26","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","unstructured":"Cohen A. , Garc\u00eda A. J. , Simari G. R. 2012. Backing and undercutting in abstract argumentation frameworks. In 7th International Symposium on Foundations of Information and Knowledge Systems, Kiel, Germany, 107\u2013123.","DOI":"10.1007\/978-3-642-28472-4_7"},{"key":"S0269888913000325_ref23","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","unstructured":"Cayrol C. , Lagasquie-Schiex M-C. 2011. Bipolarity in argumentation graphs: towards a better understanding. In 5th International Conference on Scalable Uncertainty Management, Dayton, Ohio, USA, 137\u2013148.","DOI":"10.1007\/978-3-642-23963-2_12"},{"key":"S0269888913000325_ref21","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1007\/978-0-387-98197-0_4"},{"key":"S0269888913000325_ref20","unstructured":"Cayrol C. , Lagasquie-Schiex M.-C. 2007. Coalitions of arguments in bipolar argumentation frameworks. In 7th International Workshop on Computational Models of Natural Argument, Hyderabad, India, 14\u201320."},{"key":"S0269888913000325_ref19","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","unstructured":"Cayrol C. , Lagasquie-Schiex M.-C. 2005. On the acceptability of arguments in bipolar argumentation frameworks. In 8th European Conference on Symbolic and Quantitative Approaches to Reasoning with Uncertainty, Barcelona, Spain, 378\u2013389.","DOI":"10.1007\/11518655_33"},{"key":"S0269888913000325_ref14","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.7551\/mitpress\/9780262026437.001.0001"},{"key":"S0269888913000325_ref13","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1016\/S0004-3702(01)00071-6"},{"key":"S0269888913000325_ref12","volume-title":"Graphs and Hypergraphs","author":"Berge","year":"2001"},{"key":"S0269888913000325_ref9","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1093\/logcom\/13.3.429"},{"key":"S0269888913000325_ref7","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","unstructured":"Atkinson K. , Bench-Capon T. J. M. 2007. Argumentation and standards of proof. In 11th International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Law, Stanford, California, USA, 107\u2013116.","DOI":"10.1145\/1276318.1276339"},{"key":"S0269888913000325_ref3","unstructured":"Amgoud L. , Parsons S. , Maudet N. 2000. Arguments, dialogue, and negotiation. In 14th European Conference on Artificial Intelligence, Berlin, Germany, 338\u2013342."},{"key":"S0269888913000325_ref4","unstructured":"Amgoud L. , Maudet N. , Parsons S. 2002. An argumentation-based semantics for agent communication languages. In 15th European Conference on Artificial Intelligence, Lyon, France, 38\u201342."},{"key":"S0269888913000325_ref6","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","unstructured":"Amgoud L. , Bonnefon J.-F. , Prade H. 2005. An argumentation-based approach to multiple criteria decision. In 8th European Conference on Symbolic and Quantitative Approaches to Reasoning with Uncertainty, 269\u2013280.","DOI":"10.1007\/11518655_24"},{"key":"S0269888913000325_ref1","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1023\/A:1014490210693"},{"key":"S0269888913000325_ref46","first-page":"218","volume-title":"Handbook of Philosophical Logic","author":"Prakken","year":"2002"},{"key":"S0269888913000325_ref16","unstructured":"Boella G. , Gabbay D. M. , van der Torre L. W. N. , Villata S. 2010. Support in abstract argumentation. In 3rd International Conference on Computational Models of Argument, Baroni, P., Cerutti, F., Giacomin, M. & Simari, G. R. (eds). IOS Press, 111\u2013122."},{"key":"S0269888913000325_ref50","unstructured":"Rotstein N. D. , Moguillansky M. O. , Falappa M. A. , Garc\u00eda A. J. , Simari G. R. 2008. Argument theory change: revision upon warrant. In 2nd International Conference on Computational Models of Argument, Toulouse, France, 336\u2013347."},{"key":"S0269888913000325_ref42","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1093\/logcom\/8.3.261"},{"key":"S0269888913000325_ref44","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1007\/BF00352916"},{"key":"S0269888913000325_ref32","unstructured":"G\u00f3mez Lucero M. J. , Ches\u00f1evar C. I. , Simari G. R. 2009. On the accrual of arguments in defeasible logic programming. In 21st International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence, Pasadena, California, USA, 804\u2013809."},{"key":"S0269888913000325_ref24","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1017\/S0269888906001044"},{"key":"S0269888913000325_ref56","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1093\/logcom\/13.3.319"},{"key":"S0269888913000325_ref25","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","unstructured":"Cohen A. , Garc\u00eda A. J. , Simari G. R. 2011. Backing and undercutting in defeasible logic programming. In 11th European Conference on Symbolic and Quantitative Approaches to Reasoning with Uncertainty, Belfast, Northern Ireland, UK, 50\u201361.","DOI":"10.1007\/978-3-642-22152-1_5"},{"key":"S0269888913000325_ref15","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1007\/s10458-008-9074-5"},{"key":"S0269888913000325_ref22","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1002\/int.20389"},{"key":"S0269888913000325_ref37","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1016\/j.artint.2009.02.001"},{"key":"S0269888913000325_ref11","unstructured":"Benferhat S. , Dubois D. , Kaci S. , Prade H. 2002. Bipolar representation and fusion of preferences on the possibilistic logic framework. In 8th International Conference on Principles of Knowledge Representation and Reasoning, Toulouse, France, 421\u2013448."},{"key":"S0269888913000325_ref5","unstructured":"Amgoud L. , Cayrol C. , Lagasquie-Schiex M.-C. 2004. On the bipolarity in argumentation frameworks. In 10th International Workshop on Non-Monotonic Reasoning, Whistler, BC, Canada, 1\u20139."},{"key":"S0269888913000325_ref28","unstructured":"Dubois D. , Prade H. 2005. A bipolar possibilistic representation of knowledge and preferences and its applications. In 6th International Workshop on Fuzzy Logic and Applications, Crema, Italy, 1\u201310."},{"key":"S0269888913000325_ref47","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","unstructured":"Prakken H. 2005. A study of accrual of arguments, with applications to evidential reasoning. In 10th International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Law, Bologna, Italy, 85\u201394.","DOI":"10.1145\/1165485.1165500"},{"key":"S0269888913000325_ref17","unstructured":"Boudhar I. , Nouioua F. , Risch V. 2012. Handling preferences in argumentation frameworks with necessities. In 4th International Conference on Agents and Artificial Intelligence, Vilamoura, Algarve, Portugal, 340\u2013345."},{"key":"S0269888913000325_ref33","unstructured":"Mart\u00ednez D. C. , Garc\u00eda A. J. , Simari G. R. 2006. On acceptability in abstract argumentation frameworks with an extended defeat relation. In 1st International Conference on Computational Models of Argument, Liverpool, UK, 273\u2013278."},{"key":"S0269888913000325_ref8","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1016\/j.ijar.2010.05.004"},{"key":"S0269888913000325_ref18","unstructured":"Brewka G. , Woltran S. 2010. Abstract dialectical frameworks. In 12th International Conference on the Principles of Knowledge Representation and Reasoning, Toronto, Ontario, Canada, 102\u2013111."},{"key":"S0269888913000325_ref43","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1207\/s15516709cog1104_4"},{"key":"S0269888913000325_ref52","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1016\/0004-3702(92)90069-A"},{"key":"S0269888913000325_ref10","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1016\/j.artint.2007.05.001"},{"key":"S0269888913000325_ref39","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","unstructured":"Nouioua F. , Risch V. 2010. Bipolar argumentation frameworks with specialized supports. In 22th IEEE International Conference on Tools with Artificial Intelligence, Arras, France, 215\u2013218.","DOI":"10.1109\/ICTAI.2010.37"},{"key":"S0269888913000325_ref2","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1007\/s10472-011-9271-9"}],"container-title":["The Knowledge Engineering Review"],"original-title":[],"language":"en","link":[{"URL":"https:\/\/www.cambridge.org\/core\/services\/aop-cambridge-core\/content\/view\/S0269888913000325","content-type":"unspecified","content-version":"vor","intended-application":"similarity-checking"}],"deposited":{"date-parts":[[2026,1,5]],"date-time":"2026-01-05T14:41:59Z","timestamp":1767624119000},"score":1,"resource":{"primary":{"URL":"https:\/\/www.cambridge.org\/core\/product\/identifier\/S0269888913000325\/type\/journal_article"}},"subtitle":[],"short-title":[],"issued":{"date-parts":[[2013,9,5]]},"references-count":58,"journal-issue":{"issue":"5","published-print":{"date-parts":[[2014,11]]}},"alternative-id":["S0269888913000325"],"URL":"https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1017\/s0269888913000325","relation":{},"ISSN":["0269-8889","1469-8005"],"issn-type":[{"value":"0269-8889","type":"print"},{"value":"1469-8005","type":"electronic"}],"subject":[],"published":{"date-parts":[[2013,9,5]]}}}