@Article{baroni07a,
  author =	 {Pietro Baroni and Massimiliano Giacomin},
  title =	 {On principle-based evaluation of extension-based
                  argumentation semantics},
  journal =	 {Artificial Intelligence},
  year =	 2007,
  volume =	 171,
  number =	 {10--15},
  pages =	 {675--700},
  abstract =	 {The increasing variety of semantics proposed in the
                  context of Dung's theory of argumentation makes more
                  and more inadequate the example-based approach
                  commonly adopted for evaluating and comparing
                  different semantics. To fill this gap, this paper
                  provides two main contributions. First, a set of
                  general criteria for semantics evaluation is
                  introduced by proposing a formal counterpart to
                  several intuitive notions related to the concepts of
                  maximality, defense, directionality, and
                  skepticism. Then, the proposed criteria are applied
                  in a systematic way to a representative set of
                  argumentation semantics available in the literature,
                  namely grounded, complete, preferred, stable,
                  semi-stable, ideal, prudent, and CF2 semantics.},
  url = 	 {http://jmvidal.cse.sc.edu/library/baroni07a.pdf},
  doi = 	 {10.1016/j.artint.2007.04.004}
}