# An Argumentative Approach for Explaining Preemption in Soft-Constraint Based Norms

arXiv: https://arxiv.org/abs/2409.04065 · HTML: https://mlsanity.com/paper/2409.04065/

## Key facts

- Cited by 1 papers in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026).
- Builds on 1 of its 39 references that are in the map.
- First posted on arXiv 6 Sep 2024.

## 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, 1 of 1)

- [An Argumentative Explanation Framework for Generalized Reason Model with Inconsistent Precedents](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2510.19263/) (2025)

## Abstract (arXiv)

Although various aspects of soft-constraint based norms have been explored, it is still challenging to understand preemption. Preemption is a situation where higher-level norms override lower-level norms when new information emerges. To address this, we propose a derivation state argumentation framework (DSA-framework). DSA-framework incorporates derivation states to explain how preemption arises based on evolving situational knowledge. Based on DSA-framework, we present an argumentative approach for explaining preemption. We formally prove that, under local optimality, DSA-framework can provide explanations why one consequence is obligatory or forbidden by soft-constraint based norms represented as logical constraint hierarchies.