# Some Options for Instantiation of Bipolar Argument Graphs with Deductive Arguments

arXiv: https://arxiv.org/abs/2308.04372 · HTML: https://mlsanity.com/paper/2308.04372/

## Key facts

- Cited by 1 papers in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026).
- Builds on 4 of its 31 references that are in the map.
- First posted on arXiv 8 Aug 2023.

## Builds on (most cited first, 4 of 4)

- [A Comparative Study of Ranking-based Semantics for Abstract Argumentation](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1602.01059/) (2016)
- [Epistemic Graphs for Representing and Reasoning with Positive and Negative Influences of Arguments](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1802.07489/) (2018)
- [Argument Ranking with Categoriser Function](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1406.3877/) (2014)
- [Attacker and Defender Counting Approach for Abstract Argumentation](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1506.04272/) (2015)

## Built on by (most cited first, 1 of 1)

- [Understanding Enthymemes in Argument Maps: Bridging Argument Mining and Logic-based Argumentation](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2408.08648/) (2024)

## Abstract (arXiv)

Argument graphs provide an abstract representation of an argumentative situation. A bipolar argument graph is a directed graph where each node denotes an argument, and each arc denotes the influence of one argument on another. Here we assume that the influence is supporting, attacking, or ambiguous. In a bipolar argument graph, each argument is atomic and so it has no internal structure. Yet to better understand the nature of the individual arguments, and how they interact, it is important to consider their internal structure. To address this need, this paper presents a framework based on the use of logical arguments to instantiate bipolar argument graphs, and a set of possible constraints on instantiating arguments that take into account the internal structure of the arguments, and the types of relationship between arguments.