{"status":"ok","message-type":"work","message-version":"1.0.0","message":{"indexed":{"date-parts":[[2026,5,15]],"date-time":"2026-05-15T18:14:10Z","timestamp":1778868850972,"version":"3.51.4"},"reference-count":62,"publisher":"SAGE Publications","issue":"2","license":[{"start":{"date-parts":[[2026,3,21]],"date-time":"2026-03-21T00:00:00Z","timestamp":1774051200000},"content-version":"vor","delay-in-days":0,"URL":"https:\/\/creativecommons.org\/licenses\/by-nc\/4.0\/"},{"start":{"date-parts":[[2026,3,21]],"date-time":"2026-03-21T00:00:00Z","timestamp":1774051200000},"content-version":"tdm","delay-in-days":0,"URL":"https:\/\/journals.sagepub.com\/page\/policies\/text-and-data-mining-license"}],"content-domain":{"domain":["journals.sagepub.com"],"crossmark-restriction":true},"short-container-title":["Argument &amp; Computation"],"published-print":{"date-parts":[[2026,6]]},"abstract":"<jats:p>Dung\u2019s theory of abstract argumentation provides a unified foundation to knowledge representation and reasoning. It models the acceptability of arguments through their attack and defense relations, a perspective referred to as the attack\u2014defense paradigm shift. While formal argumentation has been conceptualized in terms of argumentation as inference, argumentation as dialogue, and argumentation as balancing, most developments in abstract argumentation have focused on the inference perspective. By contrast, the dialogue perspective remains less explored. In this article, we contribute to bridging this gap by introducing new notions of agent defense, extending abstract argumentation with explicit representations of agents and their roles in defending arguments. These notions account for both individual and collective defense, enabling richer models of multi-agent reasoning. We position our proposal within the literature by comparing it with three existing approaches that extend abstract argumentation with agency: social semantics, agent-reduction semantics, and agent-filtering semantics. Using a principle-based analysis, we evaluate the formal properties of these approaches and the behavioral differences between them. This paper broadens the focus of abstract argumentation from inference-oriented models toward dialogue-oriented and agent-centered perspectives. This aligns with ongoing developments described in the Handbook of Formal Argumentation and the International Conference on Computational Models of Argument (COMMA) literature, and contributes to the shift toward modeling complex, interactive reasoning in multi-agent systems.<\/jats:p>","DOI":"10.1177\/19462174261420549","type":"journal-article","created":{"date-parts":[[2026,3,21]],"date-time":"2026-03-21T13:59:24Z","timestamp":1774101564000},"page":"141-182","update-policy":"https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1177\/sage-journals-update-policy","source":"Crossref","is-referenced-by-count":0,"title":["Agent defense in abstract argumentation: Semantics and principle-based analysis"],"prefix":"10.1177","volume":"17","author":[{"ORCID":"https:\/\/orcid.org\/0000-0002-7200-6001","authenticated-orcid":false,"given":"Liuwen","family":"Yu","sequence":"first","affiliation":[{"name":"Luxembourg Institute of Science and Technology"}],"role":[{"role":"author","vocabulary":"crossref"}]},{"ORCID":"https:\/\/orcid.org\/0000-0002-7788-2414","authenticated-orcid":false,"given":"Xu","family":"Li","sequence":"additional","affiliation":[{"name":"University of Luxembourg,\u00a0Esch-sur-Alzette, Luxembourg"}],"role":[{"role":"author","vocabulary":"crossref"}]},{"given":"Leendert","family":"van der Torre","sequence":"additional","affiliation":[{"name":"University of Luxembourg,\u00a0Esch-sur-Alzette, Luxembourg"},{"name":"Zhejiang University, Hangzhou,\u00a0China"}],"role":[{"role":"author","vocabulary":"crossref"}]}],"member":"179","published-online":{"date-parts":[[2026,3,21]]},"reference":[{"key":"e_1_3_3_2_2","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1016\/0004-3702(94)00041-X"},{"key":"e_1_3_3_3_2","unstructured":"Yu L van der Torre L Markovich R. Thirteen challenges in formal and computational argumentation. In: Gabbay D Kern-Isberner G Simari GR and Thimm M (eds) Handbook of formal argumentation. London UK: College Publications 2024 vol. 3 pp.890\u2013976."},{"key":"e_1_3_3_4_2","first-page":"1683","article-title":"Reasoning alignment for agentic AI: argumentation, belief revision, and dialogue","volume":"12","author":"Rienstra T","unstructured":"Rienstra T, van der Torre L, Yu L. Reasoning alignment for agentic AI: argumentation, belief revision, and dialogue. J Appl Log\u2014IfCoLog J 2025 Oct; 12: 1683\u20131712.","journal-title":"J Appl Log\u2014IfCoLog J"},{"key":"e_1_3_3_5_2","first-page":"2457","article-title":"Argumentation semantics as formal discussion","volume":"4","author":"Caminada M","year":"2017","unstructured":"Caminada M. Argumentation semantics as formal discussion. J Appl Log 2017; 4: 2457\u20132492.","journal-title":"J Appl Log"},{"key":"e_1_3_3_6_2","volume-title":"Handbook of formal argumentation","author":"Baroni P","year":"2018","unstructured":"Baroni P, Gabbay D, Giacomin M, et al. (eds). Handbook of formal argumentation. London, UK: College Publications, 2018, vol. 1."},{"key":"e_1_3_3_7_2","unstructured":"Gordon TF. Towards requirements analysis for formal argumentation. In: Baroni P Gabbay D Giacomin M and van der Torre L (eds) Handbook of formal argumentation. London UK: College Publications 2018 vol. 1 pp.145\u2013156."},{"key":"e_1_3_3_8_2","unstructured":"Prakken H. Historical overview of formal argumentation. In: Baroni P Gabbay D Giacomin M and van der Torre L (eds) Handbook of formal argumentation. London UK: College Publications 2018 vol. 1 pp.75\u2013143."},{"key":"e_1_3_3_9_2","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","unstructured":"Yu L van der Torre L. The A-BDI metamodel for human-level AI: argumentation as balancing dialogue and inference. In: International conference on logic and argumentation. Springer 2025 pp.361\u2013379.","DOI":"10.1007\/978-981-96-7956-0_22"},{"key":"e_1_3_3_10_2","volume-title":"Handbook of formal argumentation","author":"Gabbay D","year":"2021","unstructured":"Gabbay D, Giacomin M, Simari G, et al. (eds). Handbook of formal argumentation. London, UK: College Publications, 2021, vol. 2."},{"key":"e_1_3_3_11_2","unstructured":"Cayrol C Cohen A Lagasquie-Schiex MC. Higher-order interactions (bipolar or not) in abstract argumentation: a state of the art. In: Gabbay D Giacomin M Simari GR and Thimm M (eds) Handbook of formal argumentation. London UK: College Publications 2021 vol. 2 pp.15\u2013130."},{"key":"e_1_3_3_12_2","unstructured":"Bistarelli S Santini F. Weighted argumentation. In: Gabbay D Giacomin M Simari GR and Thimm M (eds) Handbook of formal argumentation. London UK: College Publications 2021 vol. 2 pp.355\u2013396."},{"key":"e_1_3_3_13_2","unstructured":"Atkinson K Bench-Capon T. Value-based argumentation. In: Gabbay D Giacomin M Simari GR and Thimm M (eds) Handbook of formal argumentation. London UK: College Publications 2021 vol. 2 pp.299\u2013354."},{"key":"e_1_3_3_14_2","unstructured":"Kaci S van der Torre L Vesic S et al. Preference in abstract argumentation. In: Gabbay D Giacomin M Simari GR and Thimm M (eds) Handbook of formal argumentation. London UK: College Publications 2021 vol. 2 pp.211\u2013248."},{"key":"e_1_3_3_15_2","unstructured":"Black E Maudet N Parsons S. Argumentation-based dialogue. In: Gabbay D Giacomin M Simari GR and Thimm M (eds) Handbook of formal argumentation. London UK: College Publications 2021 vol. 2 pp.511\u2013576."},{"key":"e_1_3_3_16_2","volume-title":"Handbook of formal argumentation","author":"Gabbay D","year":"2024","unstructured":"Gabbay D, Kern-Isberner G, Simari GR, et al. (eds) Handbook of formal argumentation. London, UK: College Publications, 2024, vol. 3."},{"key":"e_1_3_3_17_2","unstructured":"Xydis A Castagna F Sklar EI et al. Applications of argumentation-based dialogues. In: Gabbay D Kern-Isberner G Simari GR and Thimm M (eds) Handbook of formal argumentation. London UK: College Publications 2024 vol. 3 pp.225\u2013304."},{"key":"e_1_3_3_18_2","unstructured":"Dupuis L Michelini M \u0160e\u0161elja D et al. Argumentative agent-based models. In: Gabbay D Kern-Isberner G Simari GR and Thimm M (eds) Handbook of formal argumentation. London UK: College Publications 2024 vol. 3 pp.305\u2013376."},{"key":"e_1_3_3_19_2","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1093\/logcom\/exv055"},{"key":"e_1_3_3_20_2","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","unstructured":"Gao Y Toni F Wang H et\u00a0al. Argumentation-based multi-agent decision making with privacy preserved. In: Proceedings of the 2016 international conference on autonomous agents & multiagent systems 2016 pp.1153\u20131161.","DOI":"10.65109\/HWOZ3344"},{"key":"e_1_3_3_21_2","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","unstructured":"Karanikolas N Bisquert P Kaklamanis C. A voting argumentation framework: considering the reasoning behind preferences. In: ICAART 2019-11th international conference on agents and artificial intelligence. SCITEPRESS-Science and Technology Publications 2019 vol. 1 pp.42\u201353.","DOI":"10.5220\/0007362300420053"},{"key":"e_1_3_3_22_2","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1007\/s10458-009-9116-7"},{"key":"e_1_3_3_23_2","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1016\/j.artint.2007.04.012"},{"key":"e_1_3_3_24_2","first-page":"1671","article-title":"On the aggregation of argumentation frameworks: operators and postulates","volume":"28","author":"Delobelle J","year":"2018","unstructured":"Delobelle J, Konieczny S, Vesic S. On the aggregation of argumentation frameworks: operators and postulates. Journal of Logic and Computation, 2018; 28: 1671\u20131699.","journal-title":"Journal of Logic and Computation,"},{"key":"e_1_3_3_25_2","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","unstructured":"Aziz H Brandt F Elkind E et\u00a0al. Computational social choice: the first ten years and beyond. In: Computing and software science: state of the art and perspectives. 2019 pp.48\u201365.","DOI":"10.1007\/978-3-319-91908-9_4"},{"key":"e_1_3_3_26_2","unstructured":"Leite J Martins JG. Social abstract argumentation. In: Walsh T (ed) IJCAI 2011 Proceedings of the 22nd international joint conference on artificial intelligence Barcelona Catalonia Spain 16\u201322 July 2011 pp.2287\u20132292. IJCAI\/AAAI 2011."},{"key":"e_1_3_3_27_2","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1023\/A:1021603608656"},{"key":"e_1_3_3_28_2","volume-title":"Social choice and individual values","author":"Arrow KJ","year":"2012","unstructured":"Arrow KJ. Social choice and individual values. Yale University Press, 2012, vol. 12."},{"key":"e_1_3_3_29_2","first-page":"1","article-title":"Judgment aggregation: a primer","volume":"8","author":"Grossi D","year":"2014","unstructured":"Grossi D, Pigozzi G. Judgment aggregation: a primer. Synth Lect Artif Intell Mach Learn 2014; 8: 1\u2013151.","journal-title":"Synth Lect Artif Intell Mach Learn"},{"key":"e_1_3_3_30_2","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1007\/s11229-011-0025-3"},{"key":"e_1_3_3_31_2","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.3233\/AAC-160014"},{"key":"e_1_3_3_32_2","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","unstructured":"Arisaka R Satoh K van der Torre L. Anything you say may be used against you in a court of law - abstract agent argumentation (Triple-A). In: Pagallo U Palmirani M Casanovas P Sartor G and Villata S (eds) AI approaches to the complexity of legal systems. Braga Portugal: Springer 2017 vol. 10791 pp.427\u2013442.","DOI":"10.1007\/978-3-030-00178-0_29"},{"key":"e_1_3_3_33_2","unstructured":"van der Torre L Vesic S. The principle-based approach to abstract argumentation semantics. In: Baroni P Gabbay D Giacomin M and van der Torre L (eds) Handbook of formal argumentation. London UK: College Publications 2018 vol. 1 pp.797\u2013838."},{"key":"e_1_3_3_34_2","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1016\/j.artint.2005.05.006"},{"key":"e_1_3_3_35_2","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1016\/j.artint.2007.04.004"},{"key":"e_1_3_3_36_2","unstructured":"Qiao L Yu L Shen Y et\u00a0al. Arguing coalitions in abstract argumentation. In: Logics for new-generation AI 2021 p.93."},{"key":"e_1_3_3_37_2","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","unstructured":"Prakken H Vreeswijk G. Logics for defeasible argumentation. Handbook of philosophical logic 2002 pp.219\u2013318.","DOI":"10.1007\/978-94-017-0456-4_3"},{"key":"e_1_3_3_38_2","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1023\/A:1011288805074"},{"key":"e_1_3_3_39_2","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1016\/j.ijar.2013.10.010"},{"key":"e_1_3_3_40_2","unstructured":"Baumeister D Neugebauer D Rothe J. Collective acceptability in abstract argumentation. In: Gabbay D Giacomin M Simari GR and Thimm M (eds) Handbook of formal argumentation. London UK: College Publications 2021 vol. 2 pp.249\u2013298."},{"key":"e_1_3_3_41_2","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","unstructured":"Baumann R Brewka G Ulbricht M. Comparing weak admissibility semantics to their Dung-style counterparts\u2013reduct modularization and strong equivalence in abstract argumentation. In: Proceedings of the international conference on principles of knowledge representation and reasoning. 2020 vol. 17 pp.79\u201388.","DOI":"10.24963\/kr.2020\/9"},{"key":"e_1_3_3_42_2","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.3233\/AAC-200520"},{"key":"e_1_3_3_43_2","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1016\/j.artint.2025.104456"},{"key":"e_1_3_3_44_2","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","unstructured":"Baumann R Brewka G Ulbricht M. Revisiting the foundations of abstract argumentation\u2013semantics based on weak admissibility and weak defense. In: Proceedings of the AAAI conference on artificial intelligence. 2020 vol. 34 pp.2742\u20132749.","DOI":"10.1609\/aaai.v34i03.5661"},{"key":"e_1_3_3_45_2","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","unstructured":"Cayrol C Lagasquie-Schiex MC. On the acceptability of arguments in bipolar argumentation frameworks. In: European conference on symbolic and quantitative approaches to reasoning and uncertainty. Springer 2005 pp.378\u2013389.","DOI":"10.1007\/11518655_33"},{"key":"e_1_3_3_46_2","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","unstructured":"Yu L Al Anaissy C Vesic S et\u00a0al. A principle-based analysis of bipolar argumentation semantics. In: European conference on logics in artificial intelligence. Springer 2023 pp.209\u2013224.","DOI":"10.1007\/978-3-031-43619-2_15"},{"key":"e_1_3_3_47_2","unstructured":"Brewka G Woltran S. Abstract dialectical frameworks. In: Proceedings of the twelfth international conference on principles of knowledge representation and reasoning 2010 pp.102\u2013111."},{"key":"e_1_3_3_48_2","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","unstructured":"Rienstra T Perotti A Villata S et\u00a0al. Multi-sorted argumentation. In: Theory and applications of formal argumentation - 1st international workshop TAFA 2011 2011 pp.215\u2013231.","DOI":"10.1007\/978-3-642-29184-5_14"},{"key":"e_1_3_3_49_2","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","unstructured":"Kontarinis D Toni F. Identifying malicious behavior in multi-party bipolar argumentation debates. In: Rovatsos M Vouros GA and Juli\u00e1n V (eds) Multi-agent systems and agreement technologies - 13th European conference. Volume 9571 of Lecture Notes in Computer Science. Springer 2015 pp.267\u2013278.","DOI":"10.1007\/978-3-319-33509-4_21"},{"key":"e_1_3_3_50_2","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","unstructured":"Panisson AR Parsons S McBurney P et al. Choosing appropriate arguments from trustworthy sources. In: Computational Models of Argument 2018 pp.345\u2013352.","DOI":"10.3233\/978-1-61499-906-5-345"},{"key":"e_1_3_3_51_2","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","unstructured":"Li X van der Torre L Yu L. A logical analysis of an information filtering architecture based on epistemic trust inference. In: The 40th annual AAAI conference on artificial intelligence. Association for the Advancement of Artificial Intelligence 2025.","DOI":"10.1609\/aaai.v40i23.39001"},{"key":"e_1_3_3_52_2","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1016\/j.artint.2020.103236"},{"key":"e_1_3_3_53_2","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1016\/j.artint.2023.103885"},{"key":"e_1_3_3_54_2","first-page":"199","article-title":"Context-based argumentation frameworks and multi-agent consensus building","volume":"34","author":"Yu Z","year":"2024","unstructured":"Yu Z, Ju S, Chen W. Context-based argumentation frameworks and multi-agent consensus building. Journal of Logic and Computation, 2024; 34: 199\u2013228.","journal-title":"Journal of Logic and Computation,"},{"key":"e_1_3_3_55_2","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","unstructured":"Sakama C. Argument and belief. In: Computational models of argument (COMMA24) 2024 pp.241\u2013252.","DOI":"10.3233\/FAIA240325"},{"key":"e_1_3_3_56_2","first-page":"921","article-title":"Multi-agent argumentation and dialogue","volume":"9","author":"Arisaka R","year":"2022","unstructured":"Arisaka R, Dauphin J, Satoh K, et al. Multi-agent argumentation and dialogue. In IfCoLog Journal of Logics and Their Applications, 2022; 9: 921\u2013954.","journal-title":"In IfCoLog Journal of Logics and Their Applications,"},{"key":"e_1_3_3_57_2","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1016\/j.artint.2014.08.004"},{"key":"e_1_3_3_58_2","unstructured":"Al Anaissy C Chen C Vesic S et\u00a0al. A principle-based robustness analysis of labeling-based bipolar argumentation semantics. In: Logics for new-generation AI. Volume 416 of Lecture Notes in Computer Science. Springer 2025 pp.35\u201350."},{"key":"e_1_3_3_59_2","unstructured":"Yu L van der Torre L. A principle-based approach to bipolar argumentation. In: 18th international workshop on non-monotonic reasoning notes 2020 p.227."},{"key":"e_1_3_3_60_2","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","unstructured":"Yu L Chen D Qiao L et\u00a0al. A principle-based analysis of abstract agent argumentation semantics. In: Proceedings of the international conference on principles of knowledge representation and reasoning. 2021 vol. 18 pp.629\u2013639.","DOI":"10.24963\/kr.2021\/60"},{"key":"e_1_3_3_61_2","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1613\/jair.1.14368"},{"key":"e_1_3_3_62_2","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","unstructured":"Liao B van der Torre L. Attack\u2013defense semantics of argumentation. In: Computational models of argument. IOS Press 2024 pp.133\u2013144.","DOI":"10.3233\/FAIA240316"},{"key":"e_1_3_3_63_2","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","unstructured":"Yu L Liga D Markovich R. Addressing the right to explanation and the right to challenge through hybrid-AI: symbolic constraints over large language models via prompt engineering. In: Proceedings of the twentieth international conference on artificial intelligence and law 2025 pp.239\u2013247.","DOI":"10.1145\/3769126.3769252"}],"container-title":["Argument &amp; Computation"],"original-title":[],"language":"en","link":[{"URL":"https:\/\/journals.sagepub.com\/doi\/pdf\/10.1177\/19462174261420549","content-type":"application\/pdf","content-version":"vor","intended-application":"text-mining"},{"URL":"https:\/\/journals.sagepub.com\/doi\/full-xml\/10.1177\/19462174261420549","content-type":"application\/xml","content-version":"vor","intended-application":"text-mining"},{"URL":"https:\/\/journals.sagepub.com\/doi\/pdf\/10.1177\/19462174261420549","content-type":"unspecified","content-version":"vor","intended-application":"similarity-checking"}],"deposited":{"date-parts":[[2026,5,15]],"date-time":"2026-05-15T17:47:16Z","timestamp":1778867236000},"score":1,"resource":{"primary":{"URL":"https:\/\/journals.sagepub.com\/doi\/10.1177\/19462174261420549"}},"subtitle":[],"short-title":[],"issued":{"date-parts":[[2026,3,21]]},"references-count":62,"journal-issue":{"issue":"2","published-print":{"date-parts":[[2026,6]]}},"alternative-id":["10.1177\/19462174261420549"],"URL":"https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1177\/19462174261420549","relation":{},"ISSN":["1946-2166","1946-2174"],"issn-type":[{"value":"1946-2166","type":"print"},{"value":"1946-2174","type":"electronic"}],"subject":[],"published":{"date-parts":[[2026,3,21]]}}}