Settling on the Group's Goals: An n-Person Argumentation Game Approach

Authors:
Duy Hoang Pham;Subhasis Thakur;Guido Governatori
Affiliations:
School of Information Technology and Electrical Engineering, The University of Queensland, Brisbane, Australia and Queensland Research Laboratory, National ICT Australia,;School of Information Technology and Electrical Engineering, The University of Queensland, Brisbane, Australia;Queensland Research Laboratory, National ICT Australia,
Venue:
PRIMA '08 Proceedings of the 11th Pacific Rim International Conference on Multi-Agents: Intelligent Agents and Multi-Agent Systems
Year:
2008

Citing 10
Cited 0

On the acceptability of arguments and its fundamental role in nonmonotonic reasoning, logic programming and n-person games

Artificial Intelligence
Representation results for defeasible logic

ACM Transactions on Computational Logic (TOCL)
A Flexible Framework for Defeasible Logics

Proceedings of the Seventeenth National Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Twelfth Conference on Innovative Applications of Artificial Intelligence
Propositional defeasible logic has linear complexity

Theory and Practice of Logic Programming
Argumentation Semantics for Defeasible Logic

Journal of Logic and Computation
A metalogic formalization of legal argumentation as game trees with defeasible reasoning

ICAIL '05 Proceedings of the 10th international conference on Artificial intelligence and law
Embedding defeasible logic into logic programming

Theory and Practice of Logic Programming
Defeasible Protocols in Persuasion Dialogues

WI-IATW '06 Proceedings of the 2006 IEEE/WIC/ACM international conference on Web Intelligence and Intelligent Agent Technology
A unified and general framework for argumentation-based negotiation

Proceedings of the 6th international joint conference on Autonomous agents and multiagent systems
Dialogue games in defeasible logic

AI'07 Proceedings of the 20th Australian joint conference on Advances in artificial intelligence

Quantified Score

Hi-index	0.00

Visualization

Abstract

Argumentation games have been proved to be a robust and flexible tool to resolve conflicts among agents. An agent can propose its explanation and its goal known as a claim, which can be refuted by other agents. The situation is more complicated when there are more than two agents playing the game. We propose a weighting mechanism for competing premises to tackle with conflicts from multiple agents in an n-person game. An agent can defend its proposal by giving a counter-argument to change the "opinion" of the majority of opposing agents. During the game, an agent can exploit the knowledge that other agents expose in order to promote and defend its main claim.