Arguments over co-operative plans

Authors:
Rolando Medellin-Gasque;Katie Atkinson;Trevor Bench-Capon
Affiliations:
Department of Computer Science, University of Liverpool, Liverpool, UK;Department of Computer Science, University of Liverpool, Liverpool, UK;Department of Computer Science, University of Liverpool, Liverpool, UK
Venue:
TAFA'11 Proceedings of the First international conference on Theory and Applications of Formal Argumentation
Year:
2011

Citing 11
Cited 1

Towards a general theory of action and time

Artificial Intelligence
Perspectives on artificial intelligence planning

Eighteenth national conference on Artificial intelligence
Two party immediate response disputes: properties and efficiency

Artificial Intelligence
A Dialogue Game Protocol for Multi-Agent Argument over Proposals for Action

Autonomous Agents and Multi-Agent Systems
Towards a formal account of reasoning about evidence: argumentation schemes and generalisations

Artificial Intelligence and Law - Law, logic and defeasibility
Dialectical argumentation with argumentation schemes: an approach to legal logic

Artificial Intelligence and Law - Law, logic and defeasibility
Practical reasoning as presumptive argumentation using action based alternating transition systems

Artificial Intelligence
Command Dialogues

Argumentation in Multi-Agent Systems
A model for integrating dialogue and the execution of joint plans

Proceedings of The 8th International Conference on Autonomous Agents and Multiagent Systems - Volume 2
PDDL2.1: an extension to PDDL for expressing temporal planning domains

Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research
A generative dialogue system for arguing about plans in situation calculus

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

Cooperative dialogues for defeasible argumentation-based planning

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

Quantified Score

Hi-index	0.00

Visualization

Abstract

Autonomous planning agents that share a common goal should be able to propose, justify and share information about plans. To reach an agreement on the best plan, strategies for persuasion and negotiation could be used by agents in order to share their beliefs about the world and resolve conflicts between the agents. We present an argumentation scheme and associated critical questions to create and justify plan proposals where plans are combinations of actions requiring several agents for their execution. An analysis of different ways in which actions can combine is presented and then associated with the argumentation scheme and the critical questions. We believe these elements are necessary to enable agents to engage in rational debate over co-operative plan proposals.