Abstract
In this research note, we show the relationship between two non-admissible argumentation framework semantics: cogent and weakly admissible semantics. We prove that, while cogent extensions are weakly admissible, the converse is not true.
Cogent argument extensions are weakly admissible but not vice versa
Related papers
Ranked by semantic similarity — how closely each paper's abstract matches this one (100% = near-identical topic).
- On the links between argumentation-based reasoning and nonmonotonic reasoning (2017)61% match
- Abstractly Interpreting Argumentation Frameworks for Sharpening Extensions (2018)60% match
- Defense semantics of argumentation: encoding reasons for accepting arguments (2017)60% match
- Many-valued Argumentation, Conditionals and a Probabilistic Semantics for Gradual Argumentation (2022)60% match
- Revisiting initial sets in abstract argumentation (2022)60% match
- Extension-ranking Semantics for Abstract Argumentation Preprint (2025)60% match
- Verifiability of Argumentation Semantics (2016)60% match
- Abstract Weighted Based Gradual Semantics in Argumentation Theory (2024)59% match