# Intrinsic Argument Strength in Structured Argumentation: a Principled Approach

arXiv: https://arxiv.org/abs/2109.00318 · HTML: https://mlsanity.com/paper/2109.00318/

## Key facts

- Cited by 2 papers in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026).
- Builds on 1 of its 40 references that are in the map.
- First posted on arXiv 1 Sep 2021.

## Builds on (most cited first, 1 of 1)

- [Argumentative inference in uncertain and inconsistent knowledge bases](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1303.1503/) (2013)

## Built on by (most cited first, 2 of 2)

- [A Methodology for Incompleteness-Tolerant and Modular Gradual Semantics for Argumentative Statement Graphs](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2410.22209/) (2024)
- [On Gradual Semantics for Assumption-Based Argumentation](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2507.10076/) (2025)

## Abstract (arXiv)

Abstract argumentation provides us with methods such as gradual and Dung semantics with which to evaluate arguments after potential attacks by other arguments. Some of these methods can take intrinsic strengths of arguments as input, with which to modulate the effects of attacks between arguments. Coming from abstract argumentation, these methods look only at the relations between arguments and not at the structure of the arguments themselves. In structured argumentation the way an argument is constructed, by chaining inference rules starting from premises, is taken into consideration. In this paper we study methods for assigning an argument its intrinsic strength, based on the strengths of the premises and inference rules used to form said argument. We first define a set of principles, which are properties that strength assigning methods might satisfy. We then propose two such methods and analyse which principles they satisfy. Finally, we present a generalised system for creating novel strength assigning methods and speak to the properties of this system regarding the proposed principles.