Argumentation in Multi-Agent Systems

6th International Workshop, ArgMAS 2009, Budapest, Hungary, May 12, 2009. Revised Selected and Invited Papers
2010
ISBN: 978-3-642-12804-2
Verlag: Springer

Buch, Englisch, 321 Seiten, Format (B × H): 155 mm x 235 mm, Gewicht: 511 g

Reihe: Lecture Notes in Artificial Intelligence

This volume contains revised versions of the papers presented at the sixth e- tion of the International Workshop on Argumentation in Multi-Agent Systems, (ArgMAS2009),heldinBudapest,Hungary,inassociationwiththe8thInter- tional Conference on Autonomous Agents and Multi-Agent Systems (AAMAS 2009) in May 2009. Previous ArgMAS workshops have been held in New York City, USA (2004),Utrecht, The Netherlands (2005),Hakodate, Japan (2006), Honolulu, USA (2007) and Estoril, Portugal (2008). The event has now clearlyestablisheditselfonthe internationalcalendaramongresearchersinc- putational argument and dialectics. A brief word to explain these topics is in order. Di?erent agents within a multi-agent system (MAS) potentially have di?erential access to information and di?erent capabilities, di?erent beliefs, di?erent preferences and desires, and di?erent goals. A key aspect of the scienti?c and engineering study of mul- agentsystemsthereforehasbeenthedevelopmentofmethodsandproceduresfor identifying, assessing, reconciling, arbitrating between, managing, and mitig- ing suchdi?erences. Marketmechanismsandvotingproceduresaretwo methods fordealing with thesedi?erences. Argumentationisanother. Argumentationcan be understood as the formal interaction of di?erent arguments for and against some conclusion (e. g., a proposition, an action intention, a preference, etc. ). An agent may use argumentation techniques to perform individual reasoning for itself alone, in order to resolve con?icting evidence or to decide between c- ?icting goals it may have. Two or more agents may also jointly use dialectical argumentationto identify, express,andreconciledi?erencesbetweenthemselves, by means of interactions such as negotiation, persuasion, inquiry, and joint - liberation.

Zielgruppe

Research

Autoren/Hrsg.

McBurney, Peter

Maudet, Nicolas

Rahwan, Iyad

Parsons, Simon D.

Fachgebiete

• Mathematik | Informatik EDV | Informatik Technische Informatik Netzwerk-Hardware
• Mathematik | Informatik EDV | Informatik Informatik Mensch-Maschine-Interaktion User Interface Design & Benutzerfreundlichkeit
• Mathematik | Informatik EDV | Informatik Programmierung | Softwareentwicklung Software Engineering
• Mathematik | Informatik EDV | Informatik Technische Informatik Wartung & Reparatur
• Mathematik | Informatik EDV | Informatik Informatik Künstliche Intelligenz
• Geisteswissenschaften Design Interface Design, Interaktionsdesign, Application Design
• Mathematik | Informatik EDV | Informatik Programmierung | Softwareentwicklung Programmier- und Skriptsprachen

Inhaltsverzeichnis

Practical Reasoning and Argument about Action.- Burden of Proof in Deliberation Dialogs.- A Generative Dialogue System for Arguing about Plans in Situation Calculus.- Dominant Decisions by Argumentation Agents.- A Model for Integrating Dialogue and the Execution of Joint Plans.- Practical Reasoning Using Values.- Persuasion and Negotiation.- Strategic Argumentation in Rigorous Persuasion Dialogue.- Assumption-Based Argumentation for the Minimal Concession Strategy.- Subjective Effectiveness in Agent-to-Human Negotiation: A Frame x Personality Account.- Argumentation Theory.- Dynamics in Argumentation with Single Extensions: Attack Refinement and the Grounded Extension (Extended Version).- Arguing Using Opponent Models.- Realizing Argumentation in Multi-agent Systems Using Defeasible Logic Programming.- Computing Abductive Argumentation in Answer Set Programming.- Multi-Party Argument from Experience.- Applications and Emotions.- Using Ontology Modularization for Efficient Negotiation over Ontology Correspondences in MAS.- Applying Dialogue Games to Manage Recommendation in Social Networks.- Emotions in Rational Decision Making.- Using Personality Types to Support Argumentation.- Comparing Argumentation Frameworks for Composite Ontology Matching.