Abstract
We discuss a semantics of dynamic creation of arguments when knowledge from different agents are combined. This arises when an agent does not know the other agent’s knowledge and therefore, the agent cannot predict which arguments are attacked and which counter-arguments are used in order to attack the arguments. In this paper, we provide a more general framework for such argumentation system than previous proposed framework and provide a computational method how to decide acceptability of argument by logic programming if both agents are eager to give all the arguments.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Preview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Amgoud, L., Parsons, S., Maudet, N.: Arguments, Dialogue, and Negotiation. In: Proc. of ECAI 2000, pp. 338–342 (2000)
Amgoud, L., Dimopoulos, Y., Moraitis, P.: A General Framework for Argumentation-Based Negotiation. In: Rahwan, I., Parsons, S., Reed, C. (eds.) ArgMAS 2007. LNCS (LNAI), vol. 4946, pp. 1–17. Springer, Heidelberg (2008)
Baroni, P., Giacomin, M.: Comparing Argumentation Semantics with Respect to Skepticism. In: Mellouli, K. (ed.) ECSQARU 2007. LNCS (LNAI), vol. 4724, pp. 210–221. Springer, Heidelberg (2007)
Bikakis, A., Antoniou, G.: Defeasible Contextual Reasoning with Arguments in Ambient Intelligence. IEEE Transactions on Knowledge and Data Engineering 22, 1492–1506 (2010)
Cayrol, C., de St.-Cyr, F.D., Lagasquie-Shiex, M.-C.: Change in Abstract Argumentation Frameworks: Adding an Argument. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 38, 49–84 (2010)
Caminada, M.: Semi-stable Semantics. In: Proc. of COMMA 2006, pp. 121–130 (2006)
Cobo, M.L., Martinez, D.C., Simari, G.R.: An Approach to Timed Abstract Argumentation. In: Proc. of NMR 2010, Workshop on Argument, Dialog and Decision (2010)
Coste-Marquis, S., Devred, C., Marquis, P.: Prudent Semantics for Argumentation Frameworks. In: Proc. of ICTAI 2005, pp. 568–572 (2005)
Dung, P.M.: On the Acceptability of Arguments and its Fundamental Role in Nonmonotonic Reasoning, Logic Programming and N-Person Games. Artificial Intelligence 77, 321–357 (1995)
Dung, P.M., Mancarella, P., Toni, F.: A Dialectic Procedure for Sceptical, Assumption-based Argumentation. In: Proc. of COMMA 2006, pp. 145–156 (2006)
García, A., Chesnevar, C., Rotstein, N., Simari, G.: An Abstract Presentation of Dialectical Explanations in Defeasible Argumentation. In: Proc. of ArgNMR 2007, pp. 17–32 (2007)
Janjua, N.K., Hussain, F.K., Hussain, O.K.: Semantic Information and Knowledge Integration through Argumentative Reasoning to Support Intelligent Decision Making. Information Systems Frontiers: A Journal of Research and Innovation (2012), doi:10.1007/s10796-012-9365-x
Lucero, M.J.G., Chesñever, C.I., Simari, G.R.: On the Accrual of Arguments in Defeasible Logic Programming. In: Proc. of IJCA 2009, pp. 804–809 (2009)
Modgil, S.: Reasoning about Preferences in Argumentation Frameworks. Artificial Intelligence 173, 901–1040 (2009)
Moguillansky, M.O., et al.: Argument Theory Change Applied to Defeasible Logic Programming. In: Proc. of AAAI 2008, pp. 132–137 (2008)
Osorio, M., Zepeda, C., Nieves, J.C., Corte’s, U.: Inferring Acceptable Arguments with Answer Set Programming. In: Proc. of ENC 2005, pp. 198–205 (2005), http://www.lsi.upc.edu/~jcnieves/JCNieves-Publications/Conference/ENC05.pdf
Okuno, K., Takahashi, K.: Argumentation System with Changes of an Agent’s Knowledge Base. In: Proc. of IJCAI 2009, pp. 226–232 (2009)
Przymusinska, H., Przymusinski, T.C.: Weakly Stratified Logic Programs. Fundamenta Informaticae 13, 51–65 (1990)
Prakken, H.: Relating Protocols for Dynamic Dispute with Logics for Defeasible Argumentation. Synthese 127, 187–219 (2001)
Rahwan, I., Simari, G. (eds.): Argumentation in Artificial Intelligence. Springer (2009)
Takahashi, K., Nambu, Y.: A Semantics for Dynamic Argumentation Frameworks. In: McBurney, P., Parsons, S., Rahwan, I. (eds.) ArgMAS 2011. LNCS, vol. 7543, pp. 66–85. Springer, Heidelberg (2012)
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2013 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg
About this paper
Cite this paper
Satoh, K., Takahashi, K. (2013). Decision Making in Knowledge Integration with Dynamic Creation of Argumentation. In: Tanaka, Y., Spyratos, N., Yoshida, T., Meghini, C. (eds) Information Search, Integration and Personalization. ISIP 2012. Communications in Computer and Information Science, vol 146. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-40140-4_5
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-40140-4_5
Publisher Name: Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg
Print ISBN: 978-3-642-40139-8
Online ISBN: 978-3-642-40140-4
eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)