# A General Account of Argumentation with Preferences

arXiv: https://arxiv.org/abs/1804.06763 · HTML: https://mlsanity.com/paper/1804.06763/

## Key facts

- Cited by 21 papers in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026).
- First posted on arXiv 18 Apr 2018.

## Built on by (most cited first, 21 of 21)

- [Instantiations and Computational Aspects of Non-Flat Assumption-based Argumentation](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2404.11431/) (2024)
- [Non-flat ABA is an Instance of Bipolar Argumentation](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2305.12453/) (2023)
- [Computational Argumentation-based Chatbots: a Survey](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2401.03454/) (2024)
- [Preference-Based Abstract Argumentation for Case-Based Reasoning (with Appendix)](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2408.00108/) (2024)
- [Inferring Attack Relations for Gradual Semantics](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2211.16118/) (2022)
- [The Effect of Preferences in Abstract Argumentation Under a Claim-Centric View](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2204.13305/) (2022)
- [Theme Aspect Argumentation Model for Handling Fallacies](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2205.15141/) (2022)
- [An Argumentation-Based Legal Reasoning Approach for DL-Ontology](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2209.03070/) (2022)
- [Online Handbook of Argumentation for AI: Volume 3](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2212.07996/) (2022)
- [Current and Future Challenges in Knowledge Representation and Reasoning](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2308.04161/) (2023)
- [Explaining Non-monotonic Normative Reasoning using Argumentation Theory with Deontic Logic](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2409.11780/) (2024)
- [PHAX: A Structured Argumentation Framework for User-Centered Explainable AI in Public Health and Biomedical Sciences](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2507.22009/) (2025)
- [Comparative Expressivity for Structured Argumentation Frameworks with Uncertain Rules and Premises](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2510.18631/) (2025)
- [On the Complexity of the Grounded Semantics for Infinite Argumentation Frameworks](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2511.22376/) (2025)
- [From User Preferences to Base Score Extraction Functions in Gradual Argumentation (with Appendix)](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2602.14674/) (2026)
- [Choosing the Lens: Strategic Perspective Activation in Context-Dependent Argumentation](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2605.31581/) (2026)
- [Online Handbook of Argumentation for AI: Volume 2](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2106.10832/) (2021)
- [Value-based Practical Reasoning: Modal Logic + Argumentation](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2204.04938/) (2022)
- [Cross-Border Legal Adaptation of Autonomous Vehicle Design based on Logic and Non-monotonic Reasoning](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2507.22432/) (2025)
- [Rejecting Arguments Based on Doubt in Structured Bipolar Argumentation](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2602.03286/) (2026)
- [Some Results about the Expressivity of Preference-Incomplete Structured Argumentation Frameworks](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2606.23055/) (2026)

## Abstract (arXiv)

This paper builds on the recent ASPIC+ formalism, to develop a general framework for argumentation with preferences. We motivate a revised definition of conflict free sets of arguments, adapt ASPIC+ to accommodate a broader range of instantiating logics, and show that under some assumptions, the resulting framework satisfies key properties and rationality postulates. We then show that the generalised framework accommodates Tarskian logic instantiations extended with preferences, and then study instantiations of the framework by classical logic approaches to argumentation. We conclude by arguing that ASPIC+'s modelling of defeasible inference rules further testifies to the generality of the framework, and then examine and counter recent critiques of Dung's framework and its extensions to accommodate preferences.