Coherence and Flexibility in Dialogue Games for Argumentation
Journal of Logic and Computation
On the merging of Dung's argumentation systems
Artificial Intelligence
Inconsistency tolerance in weighted argument systems
Proceedings of The 8th International Conference on Autonomous Agents and Multiagent Systems - Volume 2
Pareto optimality in abstract argumentation
AAAI'08 Proceedings of the 23rd national conference on Artificial intelligence - Volume 1
Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research
Using Computational Argumentation to Support E-participation
IEEE Intelligent Systems
Aggregation of attack relations: a social-choice theoretical analysis of defeasibility criteria
FoIKS'08 Proceedings of the 5th international conference on Foundations of information and knowledge systems
Collective argument evaluation as judgement aggregation
Proceedings of the 9th International Conference on Autonomous Agents and Multiagent Systems: volume 1 - Volume 1
On judgment aggregation in abstract argumentation
Autonomous Agents and Multi-Agent Systems
On the outcomes of multiparty persuasion
The 10th International Conference on Autonomous Agents and Multiagent Systems - Volume 1
Multi-party argument from experience
ArgMAS'09 Proceedings of the 6th international conference on Argumentation in Multi-Agent Systems
TAFA'11 Proceedings of the First international conference on Theory and Applications of Formal Argumentation
IJCAI'11 Proceedings of the Twenty-Second international joint conference on Artificial Intelligence - Volume Volume Three
| Hi-index | 0.00 |
In recent years, several bilateral protocols regulating the exchange of arguments between agents have been proposed. When dealing with persuasion, the objective is to arbitrate among conflicting viewpoints. Often, these debates are not entirely predetermined from the initial situation, which means that agents have a chance to influence the outcome in a way that fits their individual preferences. This paper introduces a simple and intuitive protocol for multiparty argumentation, in which several (more than two) agents are equipped with argumentation systems. We further assume that they focus on a (unique) argument (or issue) --thus making the debate two-sided-- but do not coordinate. We study what outcomes can (or will) be reached if agents follow this protocol. We investigate in particular under which conditions the debate is pre-determined or not, and whether the outcome coincides with the result obtained by merging the argumentation systems.