Satisfying Rationality Postulates of Structured Argumentation Through Deductive Support -- Technical Report

arXiv:2604.21515v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: ASPIC-style structured argumentation frameworks provide a formal basis for reasoning in artificial intelligence by combining internal argument structure with abstract argumentation semantics. A key challenge in these frameworks is ensuring compliance with five critical rationality postulates: closure, direct consistency, indirect consistency, non-interference, and crash-resistance. Recent approaches, including ASPIC^{ominus} and Deductive ASPIC-, have made significant progress but fall short of meeting all postulates simultaneously under a credulous semantics (e.g. preferred) in the presence of undercuts. This paper introduces Deductive ASPIC^{ominus}, a novel framework that integrates gen-rebuttals from ASPIC^{ominus} with the Joint Support Bipolar Argumentation Frameworks (JSBAFs) of Deductive ASPIC-, incorporating preferences. We show that Deductive ASPIC^{ominus} satisfies all five rationality postulates under a version of preferred semantics. This work opens new avenues for further research on robust and logically sound structured argumentation systems.

Related

• Constrained Assumption-Based Argumentation Frameworks
• On the Complexity of the Discussion-based Semantics in Abstraction Argumentation
• Subargument Argumentation Frameworks: Separating Direct Conflict from Structural Dependency
• Technical Report -- A Context-Sensitive Multi-Level Similarity Framework for First-Order Logic Arguments: An Axiomatic Study

Source: arXiv cs.AI | 2026-04-24