Abstract
Complex decisions involve many aspects that need to be considered, which complicates determining what decision has the most preferred outcome. Artificial agents may be required to justify and discuss their decisions to others. Designers must communicate their wishes to artificial agents. Research in argumentation theory has examined how agents can argue about what decision is best using goals and values. Decisions can be justified with the goals they achieve, and goals can be justified by the values they promote. Agents may agree on having a value, but disagree about what constitutes that value. In existing work, however, it is not possible to discuss what constitutes a specific value, whether a goal promotes a value, why an agent has a value and why an agent has specific priorities over goals. This paper introduces several argument schemes, formalised in an argumentation system, to overcome these problems. The techniques presented in this paper are inspired by multi attribute decision theory.
Categories and Subject Descriptors
I.2.4 [Artificial Intelligence]: Knowledge Representation Formalisms and Methods.
General Terms: Design.
The research reported here is part of the Interactive Collaborative Information Systems (ICIS) project, supported by the Dutch Ministry of Economic Affairs, grant nr: BSIK03024.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Preview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
References
Amgoud, L., Prade, H.: Using arguments for making and explaining decisions. Artificial Intelligence 173(3-4), 413–436 (2009)
Atkinson, K., Bench-Capon, T., McBurney, P.: Computational representation of practical argument. Synthese 152(2), 157–206 (2006)
Bench-Capon, T.J.M.: Persuasion in practical argument using value-based argumentation frameworks. Journal of Logic and Computation 13(3), 429–448 (2003)
Bex, F., Prakken, H., Reed, C., Walton, D.: Towards a formal account of reasoning about evidence: Argumentation schemes and generalisations. Artificial Intelligence and Law 11(2), 125–165 (2003)
Caminada, M., Amgoud, L.: On the evaluation of argumentation formalisms. Artificial Intelligence 171(5-6), 286–310 (2007)
Dung, P.M.: On the acceptability of arguments and its fundamental role in nonmonotonic reasoning, logic programming and n-person games. Artificial Intelligence 77(2), 321–358 (1995)
Kakas, A., Moraitis, P.: Argumentation based decision making for autonomous agents. In: Proc. of 2nd Int. Conf. on Autonomous Agents and Multiagent Systems (AAMAS 2003), pp. 883–890 (2003)
Keeney, R., Raiffa, H.: Decisions with Multiple Objectives. Wiley, Chichester (1976)
Keeney, R.L.: Value-Focused Thinking: A Path to Creative Decisionmaking. Harvard University Press, Cambridge (1992)
Rokeach, M.: The nature of human values. Free Press, New York (1973)
Savage, L.J.: The foundations of statistics. Wiley, New York (1954)
Schwartz, S.H.: Universals in the content and structure of values: theoretical advances and empirical tests in 20 countries. Advances in Experimental Social Psychology 25, 1–65 (1992)
Simon, H.A.: A behavioral model of rational choice. The Quarterly Journal of Economics, 99–118 (1955)
Walton, D.N.: Argumentation Schemes for Presumptive Reasoning. Lawrence Erlbaum, Mahwah (1996)
van der Weide, T.L., Dignum, F., Meyer, J.-J.C., Prakken, G.A.W., Vreeswijk, H.: Practical reasoning using values. In: McBurney, P., Rahwan, I., Parsons, S., Maudet, N. (eds.) ArgMAS 2009. LNCS, vol. 6057, pp. 225–240. Springer, Heidelberg (2010)
Wellman, M.P., Doyle, J.: Preferential semantics for goals. In: Proceedings of the National Conference on Artificial Intelligence, pp. 698–703 (1991)
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2011 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg
About this paper
Cite this paper
van der Weide, T.L., Dignum, F., Meyer, J.J.C., Prakken, H., Vreeswijk, G.A.W. (2011). Arguing about Preferences and Decisions. In: McBurney, P., Rahwan, I., Parsons, S. (eds) Argumentation in Multi-Agent Systems. ArgMAS 2010. Lecture Notes in Computer Science(), vol 6614. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-21940-5_5
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-21940-5_5
Publisher Name: Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg
Print ISBN: 978-3-642-21939-9
Online ISBN: 978-3-642-21940-5
eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)