On relating abstract and structured probabilistic argumentation: a case study

Abstract

This paper investigates the relations between Timmer et al.'s proposal for explaining Bayesian networks with structured argumentation and abstract models of probabilistic argumentation. First some challenges are identified for incorporating probabilistic notions of argument strength in structured models of argumentation. Then it is investigated to what extent Timmer et al's approach meets these challenges and satisfies semantics and rationality conditions for probabilistic argumentation frameworks proposed in the literature. The results are used to draw conclusions about the strengths and limitations of both approaches.