The role of argumentation theory in supporting various forms of interaction among autonomous agents has been explicitly recognised in the literature. In argumentation theory, Dung's framework provides a general unifying view able to encompass most of the existing approaches to argumentation. This high level of generality is achieved by leaving unspecified the origin and the structure of arguments, and by modelling the interaction between them simply as a binary relation indicating that an argument attacks another one, making it possible to focus exclusively on semantics issues. In the first part of the tutorial, the proposals for a semantics that can be considered traditional (including stable, grounded and preferred semantics), all of them relying on the notion of admissibility, will be briefly reviewed and the relevant properties will be examined. The definition of some general principles for evaluating and comparing argumentation semantics will be also discussed, and a number of recent proposals will be introduced and evaluated with respect to such criteria. The aim of the second part of the tutorial is to introduce participants to the recent developments of the argumentation models for application in agent reasoning and communication. We will describe recent extensions to Dung's framework developed to facilitate flexible and adaptive agent reasoning over conflicting beliefs, goals, and decision making over action. In argumentation, conflict management is carried out by the formal process of defeat status computation. The tutorial will consider the generalisation of this process to a distributed multiagent setting.

Argumentation for Agent Societies

GIACOMIN, Massimiliano;
2011-01-01

Abstract

The role of argumentation theory in supporting various forms of interaction among autonomous agents has been explicitly recognised in the literature. In argumentation theory, Dung's framework provides a general unifying view able to encompass most of the existing approaches to argumentation. This high level of generality is achieved by leaving unspecified the origin and the structure of arguments, and by modelling the interaction between them simply as a binary relation indicating that an argument attacks another one, making it possible to focus exclusively on semantics issues. In the first part of the tutorial, the proposals for a semantics that can be considered traditional (including stable, grounded and preferred semantics), all of them relying on the notion of admissibility, will be briefly reviewed and the relevant properties will be examined. The definition of some general principles for evaluating and comparing argumentation semantics will be also discussed, and a number of recent proposals will be introduced and evaluated with respect to such criteria. The aim of the second part of the tutorial is to introduce participants to the recent developments of the argumentation models for application in agent reasoning and communication. We will describe recent extensions to Dung's framework developed to facilitate flexible and adaptive agent reasoning over conflicting beliefs, goals, and decision making over action. In argumentation, conflict management is carried out by the formal process of defeat status computation. The tutorial will consider the generalisation of this process to a distributed multiagent setting.
2011
File in questo prodotto:
Non ci sono file associati a questo prodotto.

I documenti in IRIS sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione.

Utilizza questo identificativo per citare o creare un link a questo documento: https://hdl.handle.net/11379/157480
Citazioni
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.pmc??? ND
  • Scopus ND
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.isi??? ND
social impact