Abstract
Many works have identified the potential benefits of using argumentation in multiagent settings, as a way to implement the capabilities of agents (eg. decision making, communication, negotiation) when confronted with specific multiagent problems. In this paper we take this idea one step further and develop the concept of a fully integrated argumentation-based agent architecture. Under this architecture, an agent is composed of a collection of modules each of which is responsible for a basic capability or reasoning task of the agent. A local argumentation theory in the module gives preferred decision choices for the module’s task in a way that is sensitive to the way the agent is currently situated in its external environment. The inter-module coordination or intra-agent control also relies on a local argumentation theory in each module that defines an internal communication policy between the modules. The paper lays the foundations of this approach, presents an abstract agent architecture and gives the general underlying argumentation machinery minimally required for building such agents, including the important aspects of inter-module coordination via argumentation. It presents the basic properties that we can expect from these agents and illustrates the possibility of this type of agent design with its advantages of high-level of flexibility and expressiveness.
This work grew out of the initiative of the 2008 Dagstuhl Workshop on the ”Theory and Practice of Argumentation Systems” to ask groups of researchers to propose ways of consolidating the work on several main themes of argumentation in Computer Science, such as the theme of argumentation in agents, which is the concern of this paper.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Preview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
References
Airiau, S., Padham, L., Sardina, S., Sen, S.: Incorporating learning in bdi agents. In: Proceedings of the ALAMAS+ALAg Workshop (May 2008)
Bench-Capon, T.J.M.: Value-based argumentation frameworks. In: NMR, pp. 443–454 (2002)
Besnard, P., Hunter, A.: Elements of Argumentation. The MIT Press (2008)
Blanck, E., Atkinson, K.: Dialogues that account for different perscpectives in collaborative argumentation. In: Proc. 8th Int. Joint Conf. on Autonomous Agents and Multiagent Systems, pp. 867–874 (2009)
Bondarenko, A., Dung, P.M., Kowalski, R.A., Toni, F.: An abstract, argumentation-theoretic approach to default reasoning. Artif. Intell. 93, 63–101 (1997)
Brewka, G., Eiter, T.: Argumentation Context Systems: A Framework for Abstract Group Argumentation. In: Erdem, E., Lin, F., Schaub, T. (eds.) LPNMR 2009. LNCS, vol. 5753, pp. 44–57. Springer, Heidelberg (2009)
Broersen, J., Dastani, M., Hulstijn, J., Huang, Z., van der Torre, L.: The boid architecture: conflicts between beliefs, obligations, intentions and desires. In: AGENTS 2001, New York, NY, USA, pp. 9–16 (2001)
Das, S.K., Fox, J., Elsdon, D., Hammond, P.: Decision making and plan management by autonomous agents: theory, implementation and applications. In: Proceedings of the First International Conference on Autonomous Agents, AGENTS 1997, pp. 276–283 (1997)
Dimopoulos, Y., Moraitis, P., Amgoud, L.: Theoretical and computational properties of preference-based argumentation. In: ECAI, pp. 463–467 (2008)
Dung, P.M.: On the acceptability of arguments and its fundamental role in nonmonotonic reasoning, logic programming and n-person games. Artificial Intelligence Journal 77, 321–357 (1995)
Dung, P.M., Mancarella, P., Toni, F.: Computing ideal sceptical argumentation. Artif. Intell. 171(10-15), 642–674 (2007)
Dung, P.M., Thang, P.M.: Modular argumentation for modelling legal doctrines in common law of contract. Artif. Intell. Law 17(3), 167–182 (2009)
Dunne, P.E., Hunter, A., McBurney, P., Parsons, S., Wooldridge, M.: Weighted argument systems: Basic definitions, algorithms, and complexity results. Artif. Intell. 175(2), 457–486 (2011)
Fox, J., Parsons, S.: On using arguments for reasoning about actions and values (1997)
García, A.J., Simari, G.R.: Defeasible logic programming: An argumentative approach. TPLP 4(1-2), 95–138 (2004)
Kakas, A.C., Mancarella, P., Sadri, F., Stathis, K., Toni, F.: Computational logic foundations of kgp agents. J. Artif. Intell. Res. (JAIR) 33, 285–348 (2008)
Kakas, A.C., Miller, R., Toni, F.: An Argumentation Framework for Reasoning about Actions and Change. In: Gelfond, M., Leone, N., Pfeifer, G. (eds.) LPNMR 1999. LNCS (LNAI), vol. 1730, pp. 78–91. Springer, Heidelberg (1999)
Kakas, A.C., Moraitis, P.: Argumentative agent deliberation, roles and context. Electr. Notes Theor. Comput. Sci. 70(5), 39–53 (2002)
Kakas, A.C., Moraitis, P.: Argumentation based decision making for autonomous agents. In: AAMAS 2003, pp. 883–890 (2003)
Modgil, S.: Reasoning about preferences in argumentation frameworks. Artificial Intelligence Journal (2009)
Morge, M., Stathis, K., Vercouter, L.: Arguing over motivations within the v3a-architecture for self-adaptation. In: Proc. of the 1st International Conference on Agents and Artificial Intelligence (ICAART), Porto, Portugal, pp. 1–6 (2009)
Noël, V., Kakas, A.: Gorgias-C: Extending Argumentation with Constraint Solving. In: Erdem, E., Lin, F., Schaub, T. (eds.) LPNMR 2009. LNCS, vol. 5753, pp. 535–541. Springer, Heidelberg (2009)
Parsons, S., Sierra, C., Jennings, N.R.: Agents that reason and negotiate by arguing. Journal of Logic and Computation 8(3), 261–292 (1998)
Parsons, S., Wooldridge, M., Amgoud, L.: An analysis of formal inter-agent dialogues. In: AAMAS, pp. 394–401 (2002)
Pollock, J.L.: Oscar: An architecture for generally intelligent agents. In: AGI, pp. 275–286 (2008)
Prakken, H., Sartor, G.: Argument-based extended logic programming with defeasible priorities. J. of Applied Non-Classical Logics 7, 25–75 (1997)
Rao, A.S., Georgeff, M.P.: BDI-agents: from theory to practice. In: Proceedings of the First International Conference on Multiagent Systems, San Francisco, USA (1995)
Sabater, J., Sierra, C., Parsons, S., Jennings, N.R.: Engineering executable agents using multi-context systems. J. Log. Comput. 12(3), 413–442 (2002)
Schut, M.C., Wooldridge, M., Parsons, S.: The theory and practice of intention reconsideration. J. Exp. Theor. Artif. Intell. 16(4), 261–293 (2004)
Toni, F.: Argumentative agents. In: IMCSIT, pp. 223–229 (2010)
Vo, Q.B., Foo, N.Y.: Reasoning about action: An argumentation - theoretic approach. J. Artif. Intell. Res. (JAIR) 24, 465–518 (2005)
Witkowski, M., Stathis, K.: A Dialectic Architecture for Computational Autonomy. In: Nickles, M., Rovatsos, M., Weiss, G. (eds.) AUTONOMY 2003. LNCS (LNAI), vol. 2969, pp. 261–273. Springer, Heidelberg (2004)
Wooldridge, M.J., Rao, A.: Foundations of rational agency. Kluwer (1999)
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2012 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg
About this paper
Cite this paper
Kakas, A., Amgoud, L., Kern-Isberner, G., Maudet, N., Moraitis, P. (2012). ABA: Argumentation Based Agents. In: McBurney, P., Parsons, S., Rahwan, I. (eds) Argumentation in Multi-Agent Systems. ArgMAS 2011. Lecture Notes in Computer Science(), vol 7543. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-33152-7_2
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-33152-7_2
Publisher Name: Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg
Print ISBN: 978-3-642-33151-0
Online ISBN: 978-3-642-33152-7
eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)