A Comparative Study of Ranking-based Semantics for Abstract   Argumentation
  Argumentation is a process of evaluating and comparing a set of arguments. A way to compare them consists in using a ranking-based semantics which rank-order arguments from the most to the least acceptable ones. Recently, a number of such semantics have been proposed independently, often associated with some desirable properties. However, there is no comparative study which takes a broader perspective. This is what we propose in this work. We provide a general comparison of all these semantics with respect to the proposed properties. That allows to underline the differences of behavior between the existing semantics. 
Elise Bonzon (LIPADE), J\'er\^ome Delobelle (CRIL), S\'ebastien   Konieczny (CRIL), Nicolas Maudet (LIP6)
cs.AI