{"status":"ok","message-type":"work","message-version":"1.0.0","message":{"indexed":{"date-parts":[[2026,5,6]],"date-time":"2026-05-06T16:23:41Z","timestamp":1778084621737,"version":"3.51.4"},"reference-count":54,"publisher":"SAGE Publications","issue":"2","license":[{"start":{"date-parts":[[2024,3,25]],"date-time":"2024-03-25T00:00:00Z","timestamp":1711324800000},"content-version":"unspecified","delay-in-days":0,"URL":"https:\/\/creativecommons.org\/licenses\/by-nc\/4.0\/"},{"start":{"date-parts":[[2024,3,25]],"date-time":"2024-03-25T00:00:00Z","timestamp":1711324800000},"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":[[2025,6]]},"abstract":"<jats:p>In the current paper we re-examine the concepts of attack semantics and collective attacks in abstract argumentation, and examine how these concepts interact with each other. For this, we systematically map the space of possibilities. Starting with standard argumentation frameworks (which consist of a directed graph with nodes and arrows) we briefly state both node semantics and arrow semantics (the latter a.k.a. attack semantics) in both their extensions-based form and labellings-based form. We then proceed with SETAFs (which consist of a directed hypergraph of nodes and arrows, to take into account the notion of collective attacks) and state both node semantics and arrow semantics, in both their extensions-based and labellings-based form. We then show equivalence between the extensions-based and labellings-based form, for node semantics and arrow semantics of AFs, as well as for node semantics and arrow semantics of SETAFs. Moreover, we show equivalence between node semantics and arrow semantics for AFs, and equivalence between node semantics and arrow semantics for SETAFs (with the notable exception of semi-stable). We also provide a novel way of converting a SETAF to an AF such that semantics are preserved, without the use of any \u201cmeta arguments\u201d.<\/jats:p>\n                  <jats:p>Although the main part of our work is on the level of abstract argumentation, we do provide an application of our theory on the instantiated level. More specifically, we show that the classical characterisation of Assumption-Based Argumentation (ABA) can be seen as an instantiation based on a SETAF, whereas the contemporary characterisation of ABA can be seen as an instantiation based on a standard AF. Our theory of how to convert a SETAF to an AF can then be used to account for both the similarities and the differences between the classical and contemporary characterisations of ABA. Most prominently, our theory is able to explain the semantic mismatch for semi-stable semantics that arises in the ABA instantiation process.<\/jats:p>","DOI":"10.3233\/aac-230011","type":"journal-article","created":{"date-parts":[[2024,3,26]],"date-time":"2024-03-26T11:55:57Z","timestamp":1711454157000},"page":"151-211","update-policy":"https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1177\/sage-journals-update-policy","source":"Crossref","is-referenced-by-count":1,"title":["Attack semantics and collective attacks revisited"],"prefix":"10.1177","volume":"16","author":[{"given":"Martin","family":"Caminada","sequence":"first","affiliation":[{"name":"Cardiff University","place":["United Kingdom"]}],"role":[{"role":"author","vocabulary":"crossref"}]},{"given":"Matthias","family":"K\u00f6nig","sequence":"additional","affiliation":[{"name":"TU Wien","place":["Austria"]}],"role":[{"role":"author","vocabulary":"crossref"}]},{"given":"Anna","family":"Rapberger","sequence":"additional","affiliation":[{"name":"Imperial College London","place":["United Kingdom"]}],"role":[{"role":"author","vocabulary":"crossref"}]},{"given":"Markus","family":"Ulbricht","sequence":"additional","affiliation":[{"name":"Leipzig University","place":["Germany"]}],"role":[{"role":"author","vocabulary":"crossref"}]}],"member":"179","published-online":{"date-parts":[[2024,3,25]]},"reference":[{"key":"e_1_3_4_2_2","unstructured":"Amgoud L. Cayrol C. On the acceptability of arguments in preference-based argumentation framework in: Proceedings of UAI 1998 1998 pp.\u00a01\u20137."},{"key":"e_1_3_4_3_2","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1017\/S0269888911000166"},{"key":"e_1_3_4_4_2","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1016\/j.artint.2007.04.004"},{"key":"e_1_3_4_5_2","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1016\/j.artint.2005.05.006"},{"key":"e_1_3_4_6_2","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1016\/j.artint.2022.103742"},{"key":"e_1_3_4_7_2","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","unstructured":"Baumann R. Strass H. On the maximal and average numbers of stable extensions in: Proceedings of TAFA 2013 LNCS Vol.\u00a08306 Springer 2013 pp.\u00a0111\u2013126. doi:10.1007\/978-3-642-54373-9_8.","DOI":"10.1007\/978-3-642-54373-9_8"},{"key":"e_1_3_4_8_2","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1093\/logcom\/13.3.429"},{"issue":"6","key":"e_1_3_4_9_2","first-page":"1437","article-title":"Joint attacks and accrual in argumentation frameworks","volume":"8","author":"Bikakis A.","year":"2021","unstructured":"Bikakis A., Cohen A., Dvo\u0159\u00e1k W., Flouris G., Parsons S., Joint attacks and accrual in argumentation frameworks, FLAP 8(6) (2021), 1437\u20131501, https:\/\/collegepublications.co.uk\/ifcolog\/?00048.","journal-title":"FLAP"},{"key":"e_1_3_4_10_2","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1007\/s11225-009-9213-2"},{"key":"e_1_3_4_11_2","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1016\/S0004-3702(97)00015-5"},{"key":"e_1_3_4_12_2","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","unstructured":"Caminada M.W.A. On the issue of reinstatement in argumentation in: Proceedings of JELIA 2006 LNAI 4160 Springer 2006 pp.\u00a0111\u2013123.","DOI":"10.1007\/11853886_11"},{"key":"e_1_3_4_13_2","unstructured":"Caminada M.W.A. Comparing two unique extension semantics for formal argumentation: Ideal and eager in: Proceedings of BNAIC 2007 2007 pp.\u00a081\u201387."},{"key":"e_1_3_4_14_2","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1016\/j.artint.2007.02.003"},{"key":"e_1_3_4_15_2","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1007\/s11225-009-9218-x"},{"key":"e_1_3_4_16_2","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","unstructured":"Caminada M.W.A. S\u00e1 S. Alc\u00e2ntara J. On the equivalence between logic programming semantics and argumentation semantics in: Proceedings of ECSQARU 2013 2013 pp.\u00a097\u2013108.","DOI":"10.1007\/978-3-642-39091-3_9"},{"key":"e_1_3_4_17_2","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1016\/j.ijar.2014.12.004"},{"key":"e_1_3_4_18_2","first-page":"15","article-title":"On the difference between assumption-based argumentation and abstract argumentation","volume":"2","author":"Caminada M.W.A.","year":"2015","unstructured":"Caminada M.W.A., S\u00e1 S., Alc\u00e2ntara J., Dvo\u0159\u00e1k W., On the difference between assumption-based argumentation and abstract argumentation, IfCoLog Journal of Logic and its Applications 2 (2015), 15\u201334.","journal-title":"IfCoLog Journal of Logic and its Applications"},{"key":"e_1_3_4_19_2","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","unstructured":"Cayrol C. Lagasquie-Schiex M. On the acceptability of arguments in bipolar argumentation frameworks in: Proceedings of ECSQARU 2005 LNCS Vol.\u00a03571 Springer 2005 pp.\u00a0378\u2013389.","DOI":"10.1007\/11518655_33"},{"key":"e_1_3_4_20_2","unstructured":"\u010cyras K. Fan X. Schulz C. Toni F. Assumption-based argumentation: Disputes explanations preferences in: Handbook of Formal Argumentation Vol.\u00a01 College Publications 2018 pp.\u00a0365\u2013408."},{"key":"e_1_3_4_21_2","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1016\/0004-3702(94)00041-X"},{"key":"e_1_3_4_22_2","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","unstructured":"Dung P.M. Kowalski R.A. Toni F. Assumption-based argumentation in: Argumentation in Artificial Intelligence Simari G. Rahwan I. eds Springer US 2009 pp.\u00a0199\u2013218. ISBN 978-0-387-98196-3. doi:10.1007\/978-0-387-98197-0_10.","DOI":"10.1007\/978-0-387-98197-0_10"},{"key":"e_1_3_4_23_2","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1016\/j.artint.2007.05.003"},{"key":"e_1_3_4_24_2","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1016\/j.artint.2015.07.006"},{"key":"e_1_3_4_25_2","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.3233\/AAC-190457"},{"key":"e_1_3_4_26_2","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1093\/logcom\/exu006"},{"key":"e_1_3_4_27_2","unstructured":"Dvo\u0159\u00e1k W. Gre\u00dfler A. Woltran S. Evaluating SETAFs via answer-set programming in: Proceedings of SAFA 2018 CEUR Workshop Proceedings Vol.\u00a02171 CEUR-WS.org2018 pp.\u00a010\u201321 http:\/\/ceur-ws.org\/Vol-2171\/paper_2.pdf."},{"key":"e_1_3_4_28_2","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1613\/jair.1.14879"},{"key":"e_1_3_4_29_2","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","unstructured":"Dvo\u0159\u00e1k W. K\u00f6nig M. Woltran S. On the complexity of preferred semantics in argumentation frameworks with bounded cycle length in: Proceedings of KR 2021 2021 pp.\u00a0671\u2013675. doi:10.24963\/kr.2021\/67.","DOI":"10.24963\/kr.2021\/67"},{"key":"e_1_3_4_30_2","unstructured":"Dvo\u0159\u00e1k W. K\u00f6nig M. Woltran S. Deletion-backdoors for argumentation frameworks with collective attacks in: Proceedings of SAFA 2022 Vol.\u00a03236 2022 pp.\u00a098\u2013110 http:\/\/ceur-ws.org\/Vol-3236\/paper8.pdf."},{"key":"e_1_3_4_31_2","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","unstructured":"Dvo\u0159\u00e1k W. K\u00f6nig M. Woltran S. Treewidth for argumentation frameworks with collective attacks in: Proceedings of COMMA 2022 FAIA Vol.\u00a0353 IOS Press 2022 pp.\u00a0140\u2013151.","DOI":"10.3233\/FAIA220148"},{"key":"e_1_3_4_32_2","unstructured":"Dvo\u0159\u00e1k W. Rapberger A. Wallner J.P. Labelling-based algorithms for SETAFs in: Proceedings of SAFA 2020 CEUR Workshop Proceedings Vol.\u00a02672 CEUR-WS.org 2020 pp.\u00a034\u201346 https:\/\/ceur-ws.org\/Vol-2672\/paper_4.pdf."},{"key":"e_1_3_4_33_2","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1093\/logcom\/exaa033"},{"key":"e_1_3_4_34_2","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","unstructured":"Dvo\u0159\u00e1k W. Rapberger A. Woltran S. Argumentation semantics under a claim-centric view: Properties expressiveness and relation to SETAFs in: Proceedings of KR 2020 2020 pp.\u00a0341\u2013350. doi:10.24963\/kr.2020\/35.","DOI":"10.24963\/kr.2020\/35"},{"key":"e_1_3_4_35_2","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","unstructured":"Dvo\u0159\u00e1k W. Rapberger A. Woltran S. A claim-centric perspective on abstract argumentation semantics: Claim-defeat principles and expressiveness Artificial Intelligence 324 (2023) 104011. doi:10.1016\/J.ARTINT.2023.104011.","DOI":"10.1016\/J.ARTINT.2023.104011"},{"key":"e_1_3_4_36_2","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1016\/j.ijar.2019.03.006"},{"key":"e_1_3_4_37_2","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1007\/s11225-009-9211-4"},{"key":"e_1_3_4_38_2","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","unstructured":"Garc\u00eda A.J. Dix J. Simari G.R. Argument-based logic programming in: Argumentation in Artificial Intelligence Simari G. Rahwan I. eds Springer US 2009 pp.\u00a0153\u2013171. ISBN 978-0-387-98196-3. doi:10.1007\/978-0-387-98197-0_8.","DOI":"10.1007\/978-0-387-98197-0_8"},{"key":"e_1_3_4_39_2","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1093\/logcom\/14.5.675"},{"key":"e_1_3_4_40_2","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","unstructured":"K\u00f6nig M. Rapberger A. Ulbricht M. Just a matter of perspective \u2013 intertranslating expressive argumentation formalisms in: Proceedings of COMMA 2022 FAIA Vol.\u00a0353 IOS Press 2022 pp.\u00a0212\u2013223.","DOI":"10.3233\/FAIA220154"},{"key":"e_1_3_4_41_2","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1016\/j.artint.2012.10.008"},{"key":"e_1_3_4_42_2","unstructured":"Modgil S. Prakken H. Abstract rule-based argumentation in: Handbook of Formal Argumentation Vol.\u00a01 College Publications 2018 pp.\u00a0287\u2013364."},{"key":"e_1_3_4_43_2","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","unstructured":"Nielsen S.H. Parsons S. A generalization of Dung\u2019s abstract framework for argumentation: Arguing with sets of attacking arguments in: Proceedings of ArgMAS 2006 LNAI Vol.\u00a04766 2006 pp.\u00a054\u201373.","DOI":"10.1007\/978-3-540-75526-5_4"},{"key":"e_1_3_4_44_2","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","unstructured":"Polberg S. Developing the abstract dialectical framework PhD thesis Vienna University of Technology Institute of Information Systems 2017.","DOI":"10.1007\/978-3-319-48758-8_28"},{"key":"e_1_3_4_45_2","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1080\/19462160903564592"},{"key":"e_1_3_4_46_2","unstructured":"Rapberger A. Defining argumentation semantics under a claim-centric view in: Proceedings of STAIRS 2020 CEUR Workshop Proceedings Vols\u00a02655 CEUR-WS.org 2020 https:\/\/ceur-ws.org\/Vol-2655\/paper2.pdf."},{"key":"e_1_3_4_47_2","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1613\/JAIR.1.14481"},{"key":"e_1_3_4_48_2","unstructured":"Schultz C. Toni F. Complete assumption labellings in: Proceedings of COMMA 2014 2014 pp.\u00a0405\u2013412."},{"key":"e_1_3_4_49_2","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1016\/0004-3702(92)90069-A"},{"key":"e_1_3_4_50_2","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","unstructured":"Toni F. Reasoning on the web with assumption-based argumentation in: Reasoning Web. Semantic Technologies for Advanced Query Answering Eiter T. Krennwallner T. eds 2012 pp.\u00a0370\u2013386. doi:10.1007\/978-3-642-33158-9_10.","DOI":"10.1007\/978-3-642-33158-9_10"},{"key":"e_1_3_4_51_2","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","unstructured":"Ulbricht M. On the maximal number of complete extensions in abstract argumentation frameworks in: Proceedings of KR 2021 2021 pp.\u00a0707\u2013711. doi:10.24963\/kr.2021\/74.","DOI":"10.24963\/kr.2021\/74"},{"key":"e_1_3_4_52_2","unstructured":"Verheij B. Two approaches to dialectical argumentation: Admissible sets and argumentation stages in: Proceedings of NAIC 1996 1996 pp.\u00a0357\u2013368."},{"key":"e_1_3_4_53_2","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","unstructured":"Villata S. Boella G. van der Torre L. Attack semantics for abstract argumentation in: Proceedings of IJCAI 2011 2011 pp.\u00a0164\u2013171.","DOI":"10.3233\/978-1-60750-619-5-111"},{"key":"e_1_3_4_54_2","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1016\/S0004-3702(96)00041-0"},{"key":"e_1_3_4_55_2","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1007\/s11225-009-9210-5"}],"container-title":["Argument &amp; Computation"],"original-title":[],"language":"en","link":[{"URL":"https:\/\/journals.sagepub.com\/doi\/pdf\/10.3233\/AAC-230011","content-type":"application\/pdf","content-version":"vor","intended-application":"text-mining"},{"URL":"https:\/\/journals.sagepub.com\/doi\/full-xml\/10.3233\/AAC-230011","content-type":"application\/xml","content-version":"vor","intended-application":"text-mining"},{"URL":"https:\/\/journals.sagepub.com\/doi\/pdf\/10.3233\/AAC-230011","content-type":"unspecified","content-version":"vor","intended-application":"similarity-checking"}],"deposited":{"date-parts":[[2026,4,28]],"date-time":"2026-04-28T11:53:29Z","timestamp":1777377209000},"score":1,"resource":{"primary":{"URL":"https:\/\/journals.sagepub.com\/doi\/10.3233\/AAC-230011"}},"subtitle":[],"short-title":[],"issued":{"date-parts":[[2024,3,25]]},"references-count":54,"journal-issue":{"issue":"2","published-print":{"date-parts":[[2025,6]]}},"alternative-id":["10.3233\/AAC-230011"],"URL":"https:\/\/doi.org\/10.3233\/aac-230011","relation":{},"ISSN":["1946-2166","1946-2174"],"issn-type":[{"value":"1946-2166","type":"print"},{"value":"1946-2174","type":"electronic"}],"subject":[],"published":{"date-parts":[[2024,3,25]]}}}