Notice: The reproducibility variables underlying each score are classified using an automated LLM-based pipeline, validated against a manually labeled dataset. LLM-based classification introduces uncertainty and potential bias; scores should be interpreted as estimates. Full accuracy metrics and methodology are described in Coakley et alK. L. Coakley, T. Snelleman, H. Hoos, and O. E. Gundersen, "The embrace of open science: An analysis of a decade of AI research and 56 800 conference papers," Under Review, 2026..
A Comparative Study of Ranking-Based Semantics for Abstract Argumentation
Authors: Elise Bonzon, Jérôme Delobelle, Sébastien Konieczny, Nicolas Maudet
AAAI 2016 | Venue PDF | LLM Run Details
| Reproducibility Variable | Result | LLM Response |
|---|---|---|
| Research Type | Theoretical | 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. |
| Researcher Affiliation | Academia | Elise Bonzon LIPADE Universit e Paris Descartes France EMAIL; J erˆome Delobelle CRIL, CNRS Universit e d Artois France EMAIL; S ebastien Konieczny CRIL, CNRS Universit e d Artois France EMAIL; Nicolas Maudet Sorbonne Universit es UPMC Univ Paris 06, CNRS LIP6, UMR 7606 75005 Paris EMAIL |
| Pseudocode | Yes | Algorithm 1: Tuples |
| Open Source Code | No | The paper does not provide any explicit statement about releasing source code for the comparative study or implementations of the semantics discussed, nor does it include a link to a code repository. |
| Open Datasets | No | The paper focuses on theoretical analysis of argumentation semantics and uses small, illustrative examples (like Example 1 with 5 arguments) rather than empirical evaluation on a dataset. No public dataset or access information for one is mentioned. |
| Dataset Splits | No | The paper focuses on theoretical analysis and does not involve empirical experiments with datasets. Therefore, there are no training, validation, or test splits described. |
| Hardware Specification | No | The paper is a theoretical comparative study and does not describe any computational experiments that would require specific hardware. Therefore, no hardware specifications are mentioned. |
| Software Dependencies | No | The paper is a theoretical comparative study and does not describe any computational experiments that would require specific software dependencies with version numbers. |
| Experiment Setup | No | The paper focuses on theoretical analysis of argumentation semantics and their properties. It does not describe any empirical experiments with specific setup details, hyperparameters, or training configurations. |