An Asymmetric Protocol for Argumentation Games in Defeasible Logic

Authors:
Jenny Eriksson Lundström;Guido Governatori;Subhasis Thakur;Vineet Padmanabhan
Affiliations:
Dept. of Information Science, Computer Science Division, Uppsala University, Sweden;School of ITEE, The University of Queensland, Brisbane, Australia;School of ITEE, The University of Queensland, Brisbane, Australia;Dept. of Computer & Information Sciences, University of Hyderabad, India
Venue:
Agent Computing and Multi-Agent Systems
Year:
2009

Citing 16
Cited 2

Defeasible logic

Handbook of logic in artificial intelligence and logic programming (vol. 3)
On the acceptability of arguments and its fundamental role in nonmonotonic reasoning, logic programming and n-person games

Artificial Intelligence
Abstract argumentation systems

Artificial Intelligence
Representation results for defeasible logic

ACM Transactions on Computational Logic (TOCL)
Argumentation Semantics for Defeasible Logic

Journal of Logic and Computation
The cost of social agents

AAMAS '06 Proceedings of the fifth international joint conference on Autonomous agents and multiagent systems
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
Modelling Defeasibility in Law: Logic or Procedure?

Fundamenta Informaticae - Deontic Logic in Computer Science
Strategic argumentation: a game theoretical investigation

Proceedings of the 11th international conference on Artificial intelligence and law
Formalising arguments about the burden of persuasion

Proceedings of the 11th international conference on Artificial intelligence and law
A rule-sceptic characterization of acceptable legal arguments

Proceedings of the 11th international conference on Artificial intelligence and law
Presumptions and Burdens of Proof

Proceedings of the 2006 conference on Legal Knowledge and Information Systems: JURIX 2006: The Nineteenth Annual Conference
Dialectic proof procedures for assumption-based, admissible argumentation

Artificial Intelligence
Dialogue games in defeasible logic

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

Proceedings of the 2010 International Symposium on Symbolic and Algebraic Computation

International Symposium on Symbolic and Algebraic Computation
On the relationship between Carneades and Defeasible Logic

Proceedings of the 13th International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Law

Quantified Score

Hi-index	0.00

Visualization

Abstract

Agent interactions where the agents hold conflicting goals could be modelled as adversarial argumentation games. In many real-life situations (e.g., criminal litigation, consumer legislation), due to ethical, moral or other principles governing interaction, the burden of proof, i.e., which party is to lose if the evidence is balanced [22], is a priori fixed to one of the parties. Analogously, when resolving disputes in a heterogeneous agent-system the unequal importance of different agents for carrying out the overall system goal need to be accounted for. In this paper we present an asymmetric protocol for an adversarial argumentation game in Defeasible Logic, suggesting Defeasible Logic as a general representation formalism for argumentation games modelling agent interactions.