A characterisation of strategy-proofness for grounded argumentation semantics
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Recently, Argumentation Mechanism Design (ArgMD) was introduced as a new paradigm for studying argumentation among self-interested agents using game-theoretic techniques.Preliminary results showed a condition under which a direct mechanism based on Dung's grounded semantics is strategy-proof (i.e.truth enforcing).But these early results dealt with a highly restricted form of agent preferences, and assumed agents can only hide, but not lie about, arguments.In this paper, we characterise strategy-proofness under grounded semantics for a more realistic preference class (namely, focal arguments).We also provide the first analysis of the case where agents can lie.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.016 | 0.049 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.005 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.014 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.008 | 0.022 |
| Open science | 0.004 | 0.007 |
| Research integrity | 0.007 | 0.008 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 0.001 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".