Arguing over Actions That Involve Multiple Criteria: A Critical Review
ECSQARU '07 Proceedings of the 9th European Conference on Symbolic and Quantitative Approaches to Reasoning with Uncertainty
Argumentation in Multi-Agent Systems
Risk agoras: dialectical argumentation for scientific reasoning
UAI'00 Proceedings of the Sixteenth conference on Uncertainty in artificial intelligence
Logic of dementia guidelines in a probabilistic argumentation framework
ECSQARU'05 Proceedings of the 8th European conference on Symbolic and Quantitative Approaches to Reasoning with Uncertainty
Using argumentation to model agent decision making in economic experiments
Autonomous Agents and Multi-Agent Systems
A Possibilistic Argumentation Decision Making Framework with Default Reasoning
Fundamenta Informaticae - Latin American Workshop on Logic Languages, Algorithms and New Methods of Reasoning (LANMR)
| Hi-index | 0.00 |
Decision making under uncertainty is central to reasoning by practical intelligent systems, and attracts great controversy. The most widely accepted approach is to represent uncertainty in terms of prior and conditional probabilities of events and the utilities of consequences of actions, and to apply standard decision theory to calculate degrees of belief and expected utilities of actions. Unfortunately, as has been observed many times, reliable probabilities are often not easily available. Furthermore the benefits of a quantitative probabilistic representation can be small by comparison with the restrictions imposed by the formalism. In this paper we summarise an approach to reasoning under uncertainty by constructing arguments for and against particular options and then describe an extension of this approach to reasoning about the expected values of actions.