# Change in Quantitative Bipolar Argumentation: Sufficient, Necessary, and Counterfactual Explanations

arXiv: https://arxiv.org/abs/2509.18215 · HTML: https://mlsanity.com/paper/2509.18215/

## Key facts

- Cited by 4 papers in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026).
- Builds on 4 of its 46 references that are in the map.
- First posted on arXiv 21 Sep 2025.

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

- [Argumentative XAI: A Survey](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2105.11266/) (2021)
- [Modular Semantics and Characteristics for Bipolar Weighted Argumentation Graphs](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1807.06685/) (2018)
- [On the Computation of Necessary and Sufficient Explanations](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2203.10451/) (2022)
- [Change in Abstract Argumentation Frameworks: Adding an Argument](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1401.3838/) (2014)

## Built on by (most cited first, 4 of 4)

- [Strength Change Explanations in Quantitative Argumentation](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2603.00008/) (2026)
- [From User Preferences to Base Score Extraction Functions in Gradual Argumentation (with Appendix)](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2602.14674/) (2026)
- [Towards an Argumentative Foundation for Evaluative AI](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2608.07473/) (2026)
- [Contrastive Explanations in Quantitative Bipolar Argumentation Frameworks](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2609.02399/) (2026)

## Abstract (arXiv)

This paper presents a formal approach to explaining change of inference in Quantitative Bipolar Argumentation Frameworks (QBAFs). When drawing conclusions from a QBAF and updating the QBAF to then again draw conclusions (and so on), our approach traces changes -- which we call strength inconsistencies -- in the partial order over argument strengths that a semantics establishes on some arguments of interest, called topic arguments. We trace the causes of strength inconsistencies to specific arguments, which then serve as explanations. We identify sufficient, necessary, and counterfactual explanations for strength inconsistencies and show that strength inconsistency explanations exist if and only if an update leads to strength inconsistency. We define a heuristic-based approach to facilitate the search for strength inconsistency explanations, for which we also provide an implementation.