Abstract
Agents that have different knowledge bases and preferences over arguments can use dialogues to exchange information and explanations. In order for the dialogue to be useful, agents need to utilize the other participants’ knowledge fully while being resistant against manipulation. Furthermore, the information they exchange can be objective but also subjective such as what goals an agent wants to achieve. To understand why another agent draws a certain conclusion it is necessary to understand and communicate preferences over arguments. This paper proposes an ASPIC-based meta-level argumentation logic for reasoning about preferences over arguments. Extended argumentation frameworks are used to determine what arguments are justified. Prakken’s dialogue framework is then adapted for meta-level arguments and a protocol is proposed that explicitly distinguishes between objective and subjective topics. Several mechanisms for using other agents’ knowledge have been proposed in the literature. This paper proposes to use different acceptance attitudes with respect to claims made in a dialogue and to store the source of those claims on a meta-level. In the meta-level, agents can then reason about the effect of other agents’ claims on the conclusive force of arguments. This makes agents more robust against manipulation and able to handle new information better.
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.
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
Atkinson, K., Bench-Capon, T., McBurney, P.: Computational representation of practical argument. Synthese 152(2), 157–206 (2006)
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)
Meyer, J.-J.C., Van Der Hoek, W.: Epistemic logic for AI and computer science. Cambridge Univ. Pr. (2004)
Modgil, S., Bench-Capon, T.: Integrating Dialectical and Accrual Modes of Argumentation. In: 3rd International Conference on Computational Models of Argument, COMMA 2010 (2010)
Modgil, S., Prakken, H.: Reasoning about preferences in structured extended argumentation frameworks. In: Giacomin, Simari, Baroni, Cerutti (eds.) Computational Models of Argument. Proc. of COMMA 2010, pp. 347–358. IOS Press (2010)
Modgil, S.: Reasoning about preferences in argumentation frameworks. Artificial Intelligence 173(9-10), 901–934 (2009)
Parsons, S., Wooldridge, M., Amgoud, L.: Properties and complexity of some formal inter-agent dialogues. Journal of Logic and Computation 13(3), 347–376 (2003)
Prakken, H.: Coherence and flexibility in dialogue games for argumentation. Journal of Logic and Computation 15(6), 1009 (2005)
Prakken, H.: A study of accrual of arguments, with applications to evidential reasoning. In: Proceedings of the 10th International Conference on A.I. and Law, pp. 85–94. ACM, NY (2005)
Prakken, H.: An abstract framework for argumentation with structured arguments. Argument and Computation 1(2), 93–124 (2010)
Sierra, C., Jennings, N., Noriega, P., Parsons, S.: A framework for argumentation-based negotiation. In: Intelligent Agents IV Agent Theories, Architectures, and Languages, pp. 177–192 (1998)
van der Weide, T.L.: Arguing to motivate decisions. PhD thesis (2011)
Vreeswijk, G.A.W.: Abstract argumentation systems. Artificial Intelligence 90(1-2), 225–279 (1997)
van der Weide, T.L., Dignum, F., Meyer, J.-J.C., Prakken, H., Vreeswijk, G.: Multi-criteria argument selection in persuasion dialogues. In: Stone, Yolum, Turner, Sonenberg (eds.) Proc. of 10th Int. Conf. on Autonomous Agents and Multiagent Systems, AAMAS 2011 (2011) (to appear)
van der Weide, T.L., Dignum, F., Meyer, J.-J.C., Prakken, H., Vreeswijk, G.A.W.: Arguing about Preferences and Decisions. In: McBurney, P., Rahwan, I., Parsons, S. (eds.) ArgMAS 2010. LNCS, vol. 6614, pp. 68–85. Springer, Heidelberg (2011)
Wooldridge, M., McBurney, P., Parsons, S.: On the Meta-logic of Arguments. In: Parsons, S., Maudet, N., Moraitis, P., Rahwan, I. (eds.) ArgMAS 2005. LNCS (LNAI), vol. 4049, pp. 42–56. Springer, Heidelberg (2006)
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2012 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg
About this paper
Cite this paper
van der Weide, T.L., Dignum, F. (2012). Reasoning about and Discussing Preferences between Arguments. In: McBurney, P., Parsons, S., Rahwan, I. (eds) Argumentation in Multi-Agent Systems. ArgMAS 2011. Lecture Notes in Computer Science(), vol 7543. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-33152-7_8
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-33152-7_8
Publisher Name: Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg
Print ISBN: 978-3-642-33151-0
Online ISBN: 978-3-642-33152-7
eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)