Heuristics in Argumentation: A Game-Theoretical Investigation

Authors:
Régis Riveret;Henry Prakken;Antonino Rotolo;Giovanni Sartor
Affiliations:
CIRSFID, University of Bologna, Italy;Department of Information and Computing Sciences, Utrecht University and Faculty of Law, University of Groningen, The Netherlands;CIRSFID, University of Bologna, Italy;CIRSFID, University of Bologna, Italy and European University Institute, Law Department, Florence, Italy
Venue:
Proceedings of the 2008 conference on Computational Models of Argument: Proceedings of COMMA 2008
Year:
2008

Citing 5
Cited 17

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

Artificial Intelligence
Integrating Artificial Intelligence, Argumentation and Game Theory to Develop an Online Dispute Resolution Environment

ICTAI '04 Proceedings of the 16th IEEE International Conference on Tools with Artificial Intelligence
Coherence and Flexibility in Dialogue Games for Argumentation

Journal of Logic and Computation
Strategic argumentation: a game theoretical investigation

Proceedings of the 11th international conference on Artificial intelligence and law
Success chances in argument games: a probabilistic approach to legal disputes

Proceedings of the 2007 conference on Legal Knowledge and Information Systems: JURIX 2007: The Twentieth Annual Conference

A Game-Theoretic Measure of Argument Strength for Abstract Argumentation

JELIA '08 Proceedings of the 11th European conference on Logics in Artificial Intelligence
Why lawyers are nice (or nasty): a game-theoretical argumentation exercise

Proceedings of the 12th International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Law
Classification and strategical issues of argumentation games on structured argumentation frameworks

Proceedings of the 9th International Conference on Autonomous Agents and Multiagent Systems: volume 1 - Volume 1
Goal Selection in Argumentation ProcessesA Formal Model of Abduction in Argument Evaluation Structures

Proceedings of the 2010 conference on Computational Models of Argument: Proceedings of COMMA 2010
Probabilistic Semantics for the Carneades Argument Model Using Bayesian Networks

Proceedings of the 2010 conference on Computational Models of Argument: Proceedings of COMMA 2010
Change in abstract argumentation frameworks: adding an argument

Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research
Multi-criteria argument selection in persuasion dialogues

The 10th International Conference on Autonomous Agents and Multiagent Systems - Volume 3
A study of computational and human strategies in revelation games

The 10th International Conference on Autonomous Agents and Multiagent Systems - Volume 3
Strategic argumentation in rigorous persuasion dialogue

ArgMAS'09 Proceedings of the 6th international conference on Argumentation in Multi-Agent Systems
Assumption-based argumentation for the minimal concession strategy

ArgMAS'09 Proceedings of the 6th international conference on Argumentation in Multi-Agent Systems
Arguing using opponent models

ArgMAS'09 Proceedings of the 6th international conference on Argumentation in Multi-Agent Systems
On strategic argument selection in structured argumentation systems

ArgMAS'10 Proceedings of the 7th international conference on Argumentation in Multi-Agent Systems
Probabilistic argumentation frameworks

TAFA'11 Proceedings of the First international conference on Theory and Applications of Formal Argumentation
Norms and learning in probabilistic logic-based agents

DEON'12 Proceedings of the 11th international conference on Deontic Logic in Computer Science
Building an epistemic logic for argumentation

JELIA'12 Proceedings of the 13th European conference on Logics in Artificial Intelligence
Multi-criteria argument selection in persuasion dialogues

ArgMAS'11 Proceedings of the 8th international conference on Argumentation in Multi-Agent Systems
Opponent modelling in persuasion dialogues

IJCAI'13 Proceedings of the Twenty-Third international joint conference on Artificial Intelligence

Quantified Score

Hi-index	0.00

Visualization

Abstract

This paper provides a game-theoretical investigation on how to determine optimal strategies in dialogue games for argumentation. To make our ideas as widely applicable as possible, we adopt an abstract dialectical setting and model dialogues as extensive games with perfect information where optimal strategies are determined by preferences over outcomes of the disputes. In turn, preferences are specified in terms of expected utility combining the probability of success of arguments with the costs and benefits associated to arguments.