{"status":"ok","message-type":"work","message-version":"1.0.0","message":{"indexed":{"date-parts":[[2025,7,30]],"date-time":"2025-07-30T16:30:54Z","timestamp":1753893054087,"version":"3.41.2"},"reference-count":34,"publisher":"Frontiers Media SA","license":[{"start":{"date-parts":[[2023,3,23]],"date-time":"2023-03-23T00:00:00Z","timestamp":1679529600000},"content-version":"vor","delay-in-days":0,"URL":"https:\/\/creativecommons.org\/licenses\/by\/4.0\/"}],"content-domain":{"domain":["frontiersin.org"],"crossmark-restriction":true},"short-container-title":["Front. Artif. Intell."],"abstract":"<jats:p>In abstract argumentation theory, many argumentation semantics have been proposed for evaluating argumentation frameworks. This article is based on the following research question: Which semantics corresponds well to what humans consider a rational judgment on the acceptability of arguments? There are two systematic ways to approach this research question: A normative perspective is provided by the principle-based approach, in which semantics are evaluated based on their satisfaction of various normatively desirable principles. A descriptive perspective is provided by the empirical approach, in which cognitive studies are conducted to determine which semantics best predicts human judgments about arguments. In this article, we combine both approaches to motivate a new argumentation semantics called SCF2. For this purpose, we introduce and motivate two new principles and show that no semantics from the literature satisfies both of them. We define SCF2 and prove that it satisfies both new principles. Furthermore, we discuss findings of a recent empirical cognitive study that provide additional support to SCF2.<\/jats:p>","DOI":"10.3389\/frai.2023.1045663","type":"journal-article","created":{"date-parts":[[2023,3,23]],"date-time":"2023-03-23T06:35:45Z","timestamp":1679553345000},"update-policy":"https:\/\/doi.org\/10.3389\/crossmark-policy","source":"Crossref","is-referenced-by-count":0,"title":["An argumentation semantics for rational human evaluation of arguments"],"prefix":"10.3389","volume":"6","author":[{"given":"Marcos","family":"Cramer","sequence":"first","affiliation":[],"role":[{"role":"author","vocabulary":"crossref"}]},{"given":"Leendert","family":"van der Torre","sequence":"additional","affiliation":[],"role":[{"role":"author","vocabulary":"crossref"}]}],"member":"1965","published-online":{"date-parts":[[2023,3,23]]},"reference":[{"key":"B1","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"134","DOI":"10.1007\/978-3-642-40381-1_11","article-title":"Ranking-based semantics for argumentation frameworks","volume-title":"Scalable Uncertainty Management","author":"Amgoud","year":"2013"},{"key":"B2","first-page":"159","article-title":"Abstract argumentation frameworks and their semantics","volume-title":"Handbook of Formal Argumentation","author":"Baroni","year":"2018"},{"key":"B3","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","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":"Artif. Intell"},{"key":"B4","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","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":"Artif. Intell"},{"key":"B5","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"18","DOI":"10.1016\/j.artint.2012.08.004","article-title":"Normal and strong expansion equivalence for argumentation frameworks","volume":"193","author":"Baumann","year":"2012","journal-title":"Artif. Intell"},{"key":"B6","first-page":"40","article-title":"SESAME-a system for specifying semantics in abstract argumentation","volume-title":"Proceedings of the First International Workshop on Systems and Algorithms for Formal Argumentation (SAFA) co-located with the 6th International Conference on Computational Models of Argument (COMMA 2016)","author":"Besnard","year":"2016"},{"key":"B7","first-page":"107","article-title":"Dynamics in argumentation with single extensions: abstraction principles and the grounded extension","volume-title":"Symbolic and Quantitative Approaches to Reasoning with Uncertainty, 10th European Conference, ECSQARU 2009","author":"Boella","year":"2009"},{"volume-title":"Abstract Dialectical Frameworks","year":"2018","author":"Brewka","key":"B8"},{"key":"B9","first-page":"577","article-title":"Processing natural language argumentation","volume-title":"Handbook of Formal Argumentation","author":"Budzynska","year":"2018"},{"key":"B10","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"1207","DOI":"10.1093\/logcom\/exr033","article-title":"Semi-stable semantics","volume":"22","author":"Caminada","year":"2012","journal-title":"J. Log. Comput"},{"key":"B11","first-page":"124","article-title":"Revision of an argumentation system","volume-title":"Principles of Knowledge Representation and Reasoning: Proceedings of the Eleventh International Conference, KR 2008","author":"Cayrol","year":"2008"},{"key":"B12","article-title":"Empirical cognitive studies about formal argumentation","volume-title":"Handbook of Formal Argumentation, Vol. 2","author":"Cerutti","year":"2021"},{"key":"B13","first-page":"207","article-title":"Formal arguments, preferences, and natural language interfaces to humans: an empirical evaluation","author":"Cerutti","year":"2014","journal-title":"Proceedings of the 21st ECAI 2014"},{"key":"B14","unstructured":"Directionality of attacks in natural language argumentation4046\n            CramerM.\n            GuillaumeM.\n          \n            SchonC.\n          RWTH Aachen UniversityProceedings of the Workshop on Bridging the Gap between Human and Automated Reasoning, Vol. 2261"},{"key":"B15","first-page":"413","article-title":"Empirical cognitive study on abstract argumentation semantics","author":"Cramer","year":"","journal-title":"Frontiers in Artificial Intelligence and Applications"},{"key":"B16","unstructured":"Empirical study on human evaluation of complex argumentation frameworks\n            CramerM.\n            GuillaumeM.\n          Proceedings of JELIA2019"},{"key":"B17","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"94","DOI":"10.1007\/978-3-030-89391-0_6","article-title":"The choice-preferred semantics for relevance-oriented acceptance of admissible sets of arguments","volume-title":"International Conference on Logic and Argumentation","author":"Cramer","year":"2021"},{"key":"B18","first-page":"24","article-title":"SCF2-an argumentation semantics for rational human judgments on argument acceptability","author":"Cramer","year":"2019","journal-title":"Proceedings of the 8th Workshop on Dynamics of Knowledge and Belief (DKB'19) and the 7th Workshop KI &Kognition (KIK'19), volume 2445 of CEUR Workshop Proceedings"},{"key":"B19","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","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":"Artif. Intell"},{"key":"B20","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"1149","DOI":"10.1093\/logcom\/exu006","article-title":"Stage semantics and the SCC-recursive schema for argumentation semantics","volume":"26","author":"Dvor\u00e1k","year":"2016","journal-title":"J. Logic Comput"},{"key":"B21","first-page":"128","article-title":"Non-admissibility in abstract argumentation","volume-title":"Computational Models of Argument - Proceedings of COMMA 2022, Cardiff, Wales, UK, 14-16 September 2022, volume 353 of Frontiers in Artificial Intelligence and Applications","author":"Dvor\u00e1k","year":"2022"},{"key":"B22","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"e0273225","DOI":"10.1371\/journal.pone.0273225","article-title":"Reasoning on conflicting information: an empirical study of formal argumentation","volume":"17","author":"Guillaume","year":"2022","journal-title":"PLoS ONE"},{"key":"B23","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.48550\/arXiv.2107.00281","article-title":"Scientia potentia est-on the role of knowledge in computational argumentation","author":"Lauscher","year":"2021","journal-title":"CoRR"},{"key":"B24","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"765","DOI":"10.1162\/coli_a_00364","article-title":"Argument mining: a survey","volume":"45","author":"Lawrence","year":"2020","journal-title":"Comput. Linguist"},{"key":"B25","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"1985","DOI":"10.1016\/j.artint.2011.06.003","article-title":"Characterizing strong equivalence for argumentation frameworks","volume":"175","author":"Oikarinen","year":"2011","journal-title":"Artif. Intell"},{"key":"B26","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"487","DOI":"10.1016\/j.ijar.2017.11.009","article-title":"Empirical evaluation of abstract argumentation: supporting the need for bipolar and probabilistic approaches","volume":"93","author":"Polberg","year":"2018","journal-title":"Int. J. Approx. Reason"},{"key":"B27","first-page":"75","article-title":"Historical overview of formal argumentation","volume-title":"Handbook of Formal Argumentation","author":"Prakken","year":"2018"},{"key":"B28","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"1483","DOI":"10.1111\/j.1551-6709.2010.01123.x","article-title":"Behavioral experiments for assessing the abstract argumentation semantics of reinstatement","volume":"34","author":"Rahwan","year":"2010","journal-title":"Cogn. Sci"},{"volume-title":"Argumentation in Artificial Intelligence, 1st Edn","year":"2009","author":"Rahwan","key":"B29"},{"key":"B30","first-page":"211","article-title":"Persistence and monotony properties of argumentation semantics","volume-title":"Theory and Applications of Formal Argumentation-Revised Selected Papers, volume 9524 of Lecture Notes in Computer Science","author":"Rienstra","year":"2015"},{"key":"B31","article-title":"The principle-based approach to abstract argumentation semantics","volume-title":"Handbook of Formal Argumentation","author":"van der Torre","year":"2018"},{"key":"B32","first-page":"3","article-title":"Argumentation theory in formal and computational perspective","volume-title":"Handbook of Formal Argumentation","author":"Van Eemeren","year":"2018"},{"key":"B33","first-page":"357","article-title":"Two approaches to dialectical argumentation: admissible sets and argumentation stages","author":"Verheij","year":"1996","journal-title":"Proceedings of the biannual International Conference on Formal and Applied Practical Reasoning (FAPR) Workshop (Universiteit)"},{"key":"B34","first-page":"3","article-title":"Structured argumentation: restricted rebut vs. unrestricted rebut","volume":"11","author":"Yu","year":"2018","journal-title":"Stud. Logic"}],"container-title":["Frontiers in Artificial Intelligence"],"original-title":[],"link":[{"URL":"https:\/\/www.frontiersin.org\/articles\/10.3389\/frai.2023.1045663\/full","content-type":"unspecified","content-version":"vor","intended-application":"similarity-checking"}],"deposited":{"date-parts":[[2023,3,23]],"date-time":"2023-03-23T06:36:12Z","timestamp":1679553372000},"score":1,"resource":{"primary":{"URL":"https:\/\/www.frontiersin.org\/articles\/10.3389\/frai.2023.1045663\/full"}},"subtitle":[],"short-title":[],"issued":{"date-parts":[[2023,3,23]]},"references-count":34,"alternative-id":["10.3389\/frai.2023.1045663"],"URL":"https:\/\/doi.org\/10.3389\/frai.2023.1045663","relation":{},"ISSN":["2624-8212"],"issn-type":[{"type":"electronic","value":"2624-8212"}],"subject":[],"published":{"date-parts":[[2023,3,23]]},"article-number":"1045663"}}