This paper considers the problem of under what circumstances an aggregation rule guarantees admissible sets of arguments that represent a good compromise between several extensions, i.e., sets of arguments of abstract argumentation frameworks each provided by a different individual. We start by showing that the preservation results of Dung’s admissibility, graded admissibility and strong admissibility during the aggregation of extensions are negative. To overcome such negative results, we define a model for extension aggregation that clearly separates the constraint supposed to be satisfied by individuals and the constraint that must be met by the collective decision. Using this model, we show that the majority rule guarantees admissible sets on profiles that satisfy a variant of Dung’s admissibility, as well as profiles of extensions with some specific characteristics.

中文翻译：

---

保证具有合理性和可行性约束的抽象论证框架的可接受性

本文考虑的问题是，在什么情况下，聚合规则可以保证代表几个扩展之间良好折衷的可接受的论点集，即抽象论点框架的论点集，每个论点由不同的个体提供。我们首先表明在扩展聚合过程中，Dung 的可接纳性、分级可接纳性和强可接纳性的保存结果是负面的。为了克服这种负面结果，我们定义了一个扩展聚合模型，该模型清楚地区分了个人应该满足的约束和集体决策必须满足的约束。使用这个模型，我们证明了多数规则保证了满足 Dung 可接纳性变体的轮廓上的可接纳集，