{"status":"ok","message-type":"work","message-version":"1.0.0","message":{"indexed":{"date-parts":[[2025,10,11]],"date-time":"2025-10-11T08:26:29Z","timestamp":1760171189351},"reference-count":43,"publisher":"Oxford University Press (OUP)","issue":"2","license":[{"start":{"date-parts":[[2021,2,4]],"date-time":"2021-02-04T00:00:00Z","timestamp":1612396800000},"content-version":"vor","delay-in-days":0,"URL":"http:\/\/creativecommons.org\/licenses\/by\/4.0\/"}],"funder":[{"name":"Wallenberg AI, Autonomous Systems and Software Program"}],"content-domain":{"domain":[],"crossmark-restriction":false},"short-container-title":[],"published-print":{"date-parts":[[2021,3,21]]},"abstract":"<jats:title>Abstract<\/jats:title>\n               <jats:p>Abstract argumentation has emerged as a method for non-monotonic reasoning that has gained popularity in the symbolic artificial intelligence community. In the literature, the different approaches to abstract argumentation that were refined over the years are typically evaluated from a formal logics perspective; an analysis that is based on models of economically rational decision-making does not exist. In this paper, we work towards addressing this issue by analysing abstract argumentation from the perspective of the rational man paradigm in microeconomic theory. To assess under which conditions abstract argumentation-based decision-making can be considered economically rational, we derive reference independence as a non-monotonic inference property from a formal model of economic rationality and create a new argumentation principle that ensures compliance with this property. We then compare the reference independence principle with other reasoning principles, in particular with cautious monotony and rational monotony. We show that the argumentation semantics as proposed in Dung\u2019s seminal paper, as well as other semantics we evaluate, with the exception of naive semantics and the SCC-recursive CF2 semantics, violate the reference independence principle. Consequently, we investigate how structural properties of argumentation frameworks impact the reference independence principle and identify cyclic expansions (both even and odd cycles) as the root of the problem. Finally, we put reference independence into the context of preference-based argumentation and show that for this argumentation variant, which explicitly models preferences, reference independence cannot be ensured in a straight-forward manner.<\/jats:p>","DOI":"10.1093\/logcom\/exab003","type":"journal-article","created":{"date-parts":[[2021,1,13]],"date-time":"2021-01-13T09:25:04Z","timestamp":1610529904000},"page":"654-699","source":"Crossref","is-referenced-by-count":11,"title":["Abstract argumentation and the rational man"],"prefix":"10.1093","volume":"31","author":[{"given":"Timotheus","family":"Kampik","sequence":"first","affiliation":[{"name":"Department of Computing Science, Ume\u00e5 University, 90187 Ume\u00e5, Sweden"}],"role":[{"role":"author","vocabulary":"crossref"}]},{"given":"Juan Carlos","family":"Nieves","sequence":"additional","affiliation":[{"name":"Department of Computing Science, Ume\u00e5 University, 90187 Ume\u00e5, Sweden, jcnieves@cs.umu.se"}],"role":[{"role":"author","vocabulary":"crossref"}]}],"member":"286","published-online":{"date-parts":[[2021,2,4]]},"reference":[{"key":"2021030623424655100_ref1","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"125","DOI":"10.1023\/A:1021603608656","article-title":"Inferring from inconsistency in preference-based argumentation frameworks","volume":"29","author":"Amgoud","year":"2002","journal-title":"Journal of Automated Reasoning"},{"key":"2021030623424655100_ref2","first-page":"159","article-title":"Abstract argumentation frameworks and their semantics","volume-title":"Handbook of Formal Argumentation","author":"Baroni","year":"2018"},{"key":"2021030623424655100_ref3","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"1051","DOI":"10.1093\/logcom\/exu012","article-title":"Introduction to the special issue on loops in argumentation","volume":"26","author":"Baroni","journal-title":"Journal of Logic and Computation"},{"key":"2021030623424655100_ref4","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"675","DOI":"10.1016\/j.artint.2007.04.004","article-title":"On principle-based evaluation of extension-based argumentation semantics","volume":"171","author":"Baroni","year":"2007","journal-title":"Artificial Intelligence"},{"key":"2021030623424655100_ref5","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"162","DOI":"10.1016\/j.artint.2005.05.006","article-title":"Scc-recursiveness: a general schema for argumentation semantics","volume":"168","author":"Baroni","year":"2005","journal-title":"Artificial Intelligence"},{"key":"2021030623424655100_ref6","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"479","DOI":"10.1162\/003355397555262","article-title":"A test of the theory of reference-dependent preferences","volume":"112","author":"Bateman","year":"1997","journal-title":"The Quarterly Journal of Economics"},{"key":"2021030623424655100_ref7","first-page":"127","article-title":"What does it take to enforce an argument? Minimal change in abstract argumentation","volume-title":"Proceedings of the 20th European Conference on Artificial Intelligence (NLD, 2012), ECAI\u201912","author":"Baumann","year":"2012"},{"key":"2021030623424655100_ref8","first-page":"2779","article-title":"On the nature of argumentation semantics: existence and uniqueness, expressibility, and replaceability","volume":"4","author":"Baumann","year":"2017","journal-title":"Journal of Applied Logics"},{"key":"2021030623424655100_ref9","first-page":"75","article-title":"Expanding argumentation frameworks: enforcing and monotonicity results","volume":"10","author":"Baumann","year":"2010","journal-title":"COMMA"},{"key":"2021030623424655100_ref10","first-page":"2742","article-title":"Revisiting the foundations of abstract argumentation\u2014semantics based on weak admissibility and weak defense","volume-title":"The Thirty-Fourth AAAI Conference on Artificial Intelligence, AAAI 2020, The Thirty-Second Innovative Applications of Artificial Intelligence Conference, IAAI 2020, The Tenth AAAI Symposium on Educational Advances in Artificial Intelligence, EAAI 2020, New York, NY, USA, February 7\u201312, 2020","author":"Baumann","year":"2020"},{"key":"2021030623424655100_ref11","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"1293","DOI":"10.1093\/logcom\/exu010","article-title":"The role of self-attacking arguments in characterizations of equivalence notions","volume":"26","author":"Baumann","year":"2016","journal-title":"Journal of Logic and Computation"},{"key":"2021030623424655100_ref12","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"429","DOI":"10.1093\/logcom\/13.3.429","article-title":"Persuasion in practical argument using value-based argumentation frameworks","volume":"13","author":"Bench-Capon","year":"2003","journal-title":"Journal of Logic and Computation"},{"key":"2021030623424655100_ref13","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"259","DOI":"10.1016\/S0004-3702(97)00012-X","article-title":"Nonmonotonic reasoning, conditional objects and possibility theory","volume":"92","author":"Benferhat","year":"1997","journal-title":"Artificial Intelligence"},{"key":"2021030623424655100_ref14","first-page":"81","article-title":"Comparing two unique extension semantics for formal argumentation: ideal and eager","volume-title":"Proceedings of the 19th Belgian-Dutch Conference on Artificial Intelligence (BNAIC 2007)","author":"Caminada","year":"2007"},{"key":"2021030623424655100_ref15","first-page":"2707","article-title":"Rationality postulates: applying argumentation theory for non-monotonic reasoning","volume-title":"Journal of Applied Logics","author":"Caminada","year":"2017"},{"key":"2021030623424655100_ref16","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"1207","DOI":"10.1093\/logcom\/exr033","article-title":"Semi-stable semantics","volume":"22","author":"Caminada","year":"2012","journal-title":"Journal of Logic and Computation"},{"key":"2021030623424655100_ref17","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"92","DOI":"10.1007\/978-3-319-28460-6_6","article-title":"Non-monotonic inference properties for assumption-based argumentation","volume-title":"Theory and Applications of Formal Argumentation (Cham, 2015)","author":"\u010cyras","year":"2015"},{"key":"2021030623424655100_ref18","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","DOI":"10.1017\/CBO9780511809088","volume-title":"Introduction to Lattices and Order","author":"Davey","year":"2002"},{"key":"2021030623424655100_ref19","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"60","DOI":"10.1145\/3278721.3278745","article-title":"Ethics by design: Necessity or curse?","volume-title":"Proceedings of the 2018 AAAI\/ACM Conference on AI, Ethics, and Society","author":"Dignum","year":"2018"},{"key":"2021030623424655100_ref20","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"462","DOI":"10.1007\/978-3-540-30227-8_39","article-title":"On sceptical versus credulous acceptance for abstract argument systems","volume-title":"Logics in Artificial Intelligence","author":"Doutre","year":"2004"},{"key":"2021030623424655100_ref21","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"225","DOI":"10.1002\/(SICI)1520-6793(199905)16:3<225::AID-MAR3>3.0.CO;2-X","article-title":"The robustness of the asymmetrically dominated effect: Buying frames, phantom alternatives, and in-store purchases","volume":"16","author":"Doyle","year":"1999","journal-title":"Psychology & Marketing"},{"key":"2021030623424655100_ref22","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"321","DOI":"10.1016\/0004-3702(94)00041-X","article-title":"On the acceptability of arguments and its fundamental role in nonmonotonic reasoning, logic programming and n-person games","volume":"77","author":"Dung","year":"1995","journal-title":"Artificial intelligence"},{"key":"2021030623424655100_ref23","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"642","DOI":"10.1016\/j.artint.2007.05.003","article-title":"Computing ideal sceptical argumentation","volume":"171","author":"Dung","year":"2007","journal-title":"Artificial Intelligence"},{"key":"2021030623424655100_ref24","first-page":"1149","article-title":"Stage semantics and the SCC-recursive schema for argumentation semantics","volume":"4","author":"Dvo\u0159\u00e1k","year":"02 2014","journal-title":"Journal of Logic and Computation 26"},{"key":"2021030623424655100_ref25","first-page":"1065","article-title":"The handling of loops in argumentation networks","volume":"4","author":"Gabbay","year":"01 2014","journal-title":"Journal of Logic and Computation 26"},{"key":"2021030623424655100_ref26","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"439","DOI":"10.1007\/978-3-642-82453-1_15","article-title":"Theoretical foundations for non-monotonic reasoning in expert systems","volume-title":"Logics and Models of Concurrent Systems","author":"Gabbay","year":"1985"},{"key":"2021030623424655100_ref27","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"1449","DOI":"10.1257\/000282803322655392","article-title":"Maps of bounded rationality: Psychology for behavioral economics","volume":"93","author":"Kahneman","year":"2003","journal-title":"American economic review"},{"key":"2021030623424655100_ref28","article-title":"Towards diarg: An argumentation-based dialogue reasoning engine","author":"Kampik","year":"2020","journal-title":"In SAFA@ COMMA"},{"key":"2021030623424655100_ref29","first-page":"1","article-title":"Probabilistic argumentation frameworks","volume-title":"International Workshop on Theorie and Applications of Formal Argumentation","author":"Li","year":"2011"},{"key":"2021030623424655100_ref30","first-page":"10:1","article-title":"Argumentation mining: State of the art and emerging trends","volume":"2","author":"Lippi","year":". 2016","journal-title":"ACM Trans. Internet Technol. 16"},{"key":"2021030623424655100_ref31","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"48","DOI":"10.1073\/pnas.36.1.48","article-title":"Equilibrium points in n-person games","volume":"36","author":"Nash","year":"1950","journal-title":"Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences"},{"key":"2021030623424655100_ref32","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"41","DOI":"10.3233\/FI-2011-598","article-title":"A possibilistic argumentation decision making framework with default reasoning","volume":"113","author":"Nieves","year":"2011","journal-title":"Fundamenta Informaticae"},{"key":"2021030623424655100_ref33","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"477","DOI":"10.1038\/s41586-019-1138-y","article-title":"Machine behaviour","volume":"568","author":"Rahwan","year":"2019","journal-title":"Nature"},{"key":"2021030623424655100_ref34","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","DOI":"10.7551\/mitpress\/4702.001.0001","volume-title":"Modeling Bounded Rationality","author":"Rubinstein","year":"1998"},{"key":"2021030623424655100_ref35","author":"Russell","year":"2016","journal-title":"Artificial Intelligence: A Modern Approach"},{"key":"2021030623424655100_ref36","first-page":"707","article-title":"Optimal tableaux for conditional logics with cautious monotonicity","volume-title":"Proceedings of the 2010 Conference on ECAI 2010: 19th European Conference on Artificial Intelligence (NLD, 2010)","author":"Schr\u00f6der","year":"2010"},{"key":"2021030623424655100_ref37","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"277","DOI":"10.1017\/S0266267100001425","article-title":"Utility: Ideas and terminology","volume":"7","author":"Sen","year":"1991","journal-title":"Economics and Philosophy"},{"key":"2021030623424655100_ref38","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"99","DOI":"10.2307\/1884852","article-title":"A behavioral model of rational choice","volume":"69","author":"Simon","year":"1955","journal-title":"The Quarterly Journal of Economics"},{"key":"2021030623424655100_ref39","first-page":"204","article-title":"The causes of preference reversal","volume":"80","author":"Tversky","year":"1990","journal-title":"The American Economic Review"},{"key":"2021030623424655100_ref40","first-page":"8","article-title":"The principle-based approach to abstract argumentation semantics","volume":"4","author":"van der Torre","year":"2017","journal-title":"IfCoLog Journal of Logics and Their Applications"},{"key":"2021030623424655100_ref41","first-page":"357","article-title":"Two approaches to dialectical argumentation: admissible sets and argumentation stages","volume":"96","author":"Verheij","year":"1996","journal-title":"Proceedings of the Eighth Dutch Conference on Artificial Intelligence (NAIC 1996)"},{"key":"2021030623424655100_ref42","volume-title":"Theory of Games and Economic Behavior (Commemorative Edition)","author":"Von Neumann","year":"2007"},{"key":"2021030623424655100_ref43","first-page":"12","article-title":"A labelling-based justification status of arguments","volume":"3","author":"Wu","year":"2010","journal-title":"Studies in Logic"}],"container-title":["Journal of Logic and Computation"],"original-title":[],"language":"en","link":[{"URL":"http:\/\/academic.oup.com\/logcom\/article-pdf\/31\/2\/654\/36430779\/exab003.pdf","content-type":"application\/pdf","content-version":"vor","intended-application":"syndication"},{"URL":"http:\/\/academic.oup.com\/logcom\/article-pdf\/31\/2\/654\/36430779\/exab003.pdf","content-type":"unspecified","content-version":"vor","intended-application":"similarity-checking"}],"deposited":{"date-parts":[[2021,3,6]],"date-time":"2021-03-06T23:43:29Z","timestamp":1615074209000},"score":1,"resource":{"primary":{"URL":"https:\/\/academic.oup.com\/logcom\/article\/31\/2\/654\/6128412"}},"subtitle":[],"short-title":[],"issued":{"date-parts":[[2021,2,4]]},"references-count":43,"journal-issue":{"issue":"2","published-online":{"date-parts":[[2021,2,4]]},"published-print":{"date-parts":[[2021,3,21]]}},"URL":"https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1093\/logcom\/exab003","relation":{},"ISSN":["0955-792X","1465-363X"],"issn-type":[{"value":"0955-792X","type":"print"},{"value":"1465-363X","type":"electronic"}],"subject":[],"published-other":{"date-parts":[[2021,3]]},"published":{"date-parts":[[2021,2,4]]}}}