Advertisement

Autonomous Agents and Multi-Agent Systems

, Volume 11, Issue 2, pp 153–171 | Cite as

A Dialogue Game Protocol for Multi-Agent Argument over Proposals for Action

  • Katie Atkinson
  • Trevor Bench-Capon
  • Peter Mcburney
Article

Abstract.

We present the syntax and semantics for a multi-agent dialogue game protocol which permits argument over proposals for action. The protocol, called the Persuasive Argument for Multiple Agents (PARMA) Protocol, embodies an earlier theory by the authors of persuasion over action which enables participants to rationally propose, attack, and defend, an action or course of actions (or inaction). We present an outline of both an axiomatic and a denotational semantics, and discuss implementation of the protocol, in the context of both human and artificial agents.

Keywords

argumentation practical reasoning protocols BDI agents 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    Atkinson, K. M., Bench-Capon, T. J. M., McBurney, P. 2004“Attacks on a presumptive argument scheme in multi-agent systems: pre-conditions in terms of beliefs and desires”, Technical Report ULCS-04-015, Department of Computer ScienceUniversity of LiverpoolUKGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Atkinson, K. M., Bench-Capon, T. J. M., McBurney, P. 2004“Computational representation of persuasive argument”, Technical Report ULCS-04-006, Department of Computer ScienceUniversity of LiverpoolUKGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Atkinson, K. M., Bench-Capon, T. J. M., McBurney, P. 2004“Implementation of a dialogue game for persuasion over action”, Technical Report ULCS-04-005, Department of Computer ScienceUniversity of LiverpoolUKGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    K. M. Atkinson, T. J. M. Bench-Capon, and P. McBurney. “Justifying practical reasoning”. In F. Grasso, C. Reed, and G. Carenini, (eds.), Proceedings of the Fourth International Workshop on Computational Models of Natural Argument (CMNA 2004), Valencia, Spain, pp. 87-90, 2004.Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Atkinson, K. M, Bench-Capon, T. J. M., McBurney, P. 2004“Parmenides: Facilitating democratic debate”Traunmüller, R. eds. Electronic Government 2004, Lecture Notes in Computer Science 3183SpringerBerlin313316Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    K. M. Atkinson, T. J. M. Bench-Capon, and P. McBurney, “Arguing about cases as practical reasoning”, In Proceedings of the 10th International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Law (ICAIL 2005). ACM Press, New York, USA. In Press.Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Atkinson, K. M., Bench-Capon, T. J. M., Modgil, S. 2005“Value added: Processing information with argumentation”, Technical Report ULCS-05-004, Department of Computer ScienceUniversity of LiverpoolUKGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Bench-Capon, T. J. M. 2003“Persuasion in practical argument using value based argumentation frameworks”J. Logic Comput.1342948CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Beun, R-J., Eijk, R.M. 2004“A co-operative dialogue game for resolving ontological discrepancies”Dignum, F. eds. Advances in Agent Communication, Lecture Notes in Artificial Intelligence 2922SpringerBerlin, Germany349363Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Dung, P. M. 1995“On the acceptability of arguments and its fundamental role in nonmonotonic reasoning, logic programming and n-person games”Artif Intelligence77321357CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Dunne, P. E., Bench-Capon, T. J. M. 2004“Identifying audience preferences in legal and social domains”Galindo, F.Takizawa, M.Traunmüller, R. eds. Proceedings of the 16th International Conference on Database and Expert Systems Applications (DEXA 2004), Lecture Notes in Computer Science, 3180Springer VerlagBerlin, Germany518527Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Gárdenfors, P. 1994“The role of expectations in reasoning”Masuch, M.Pólos, L. eds. Knowledge Representation and Reasoning under Uncertainty: Logic at Work, Lecture Notes in Artificial Intelligence 808SpringerBerlin, Germany116Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    R.Goldblatt, “Topoi: The Categorial Analysis of Logic. North-Holland”, Amsterdum, The Netherlands, 1979.Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Gordon, T. F. 1994“The pleadings game: An exercise in computational dialectics”Artif. Intelligence and Law.2239292CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    K.M. Greenwood, T.J.M. Bench-Capon, and P.M. McBurney. “Towards a computational account of persuasion in law”, In Proceedings of the 9th International Conference on AI and Law (ICAIL-2003), New York, NY, USA, 2003. ACM Press, pp. 22-31, 2003.Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Habermas, J. 1996Between Facts and Norms: Contributions to a Discourse Theory of Law and DemocracyMIT PressCambridge, MA, USA(Translation by W. Rehg).Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Hamblin, C. L. 1970FallaciesMethuenLondon, UKGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Kamp, H., Reyle, U. 1993From Discourse to Logic: Introduction to Modeltheoretic Semantics of Natural Language, Formal Logic and Discourse Representation Theory, vol. 2Kluwer AcademicDordrecht, The NetherlandsGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Labrou, Y., Finin, T., Peng, Y. 1999“Agent communication languages: The current landscape”IEEE Intelligent Syst144552CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Luck, M., McBurney, P., Preist, C. 2003Agent Technology: Enabling Next Generation Computing. A Roadmap for Agent Based ComputingAgentLink IISouthampton, UKGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    McBurney, P., Parsons, S. 2002“Games that agents play: A formal framework for dialogues between autonomous agents”J. Logic, Lang Inf.11315334Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    P. McBurney and S. Parsons. “A denotational semantics for deliberation dialogues”, In N. R. Jennings, C. Sierra, E. Sonenberg, and M. Tambe, (eds.), Proceedings of the 3rd International Joint Conference on Autonomous Agents and Multi-Agent Systems (AAMAS 2004), pp. 86-93, 2004.Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    N. Oren, T. Norman, A. Preece, and S. Chalmers, “Policing virtual organisations. In C. Ghidini, P. Giorgini, and W. van der Hoek, (eds.),Proceedings of the 2nd European Conference on Multi Agent Systems (EUMAS 2004), Barcelona, Spain, pp. 499-508, 2004.Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Perelman, C., Olbrechts-Tyteca, L. 1969The New Rhetoric: A Treatise on ArgumentationUniversity of Notre Dame PressNotre Dame, IN, USAGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Raven, D. 1996“The enculturation of logical practice”Configurations3381425MathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Richardson, H. S. 1994Practical Reasoning about Final EndsCambridge University PressCambridge, UKGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Searle, J. R. 2001Rationality in ActionMIT PressCambridge, MA, USAGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Sierra, C., Jennings, N.R., Noriega, P., Parsons, S. 1998“A framework for argument based negotiation”Rao, A.Singh, M.Wooldridge, M. eds. Intelligent Agents IV, Lecture Notes in Artificial Inteligence 1365SpringerBerlin ,Germany177192Google Scholar
  29. 29.
    V. Tamma, I. Blacoe, B. Lithgow-Smith, and M. Wooldridge. “Serse: Searching for semantic web content”, In Proceedings of the 16th European Conference on Artificial Intelligence (ECAI-04), Valencia, Spain, 2004.Google Scholar
  30. 30.
    V. A. M. Tamma and T. J. M. Bench-Capon. “A conceptual model to facilitate knowledge sharing in multi-agent systems. In Proceedings of Autonomous Agents 2001 Workshop on Ontologies in Agent Systems (OAS 2001), Montreal, Canada, pp. 69-76, 2001.Google Scholar
  31. 31.
    R. D. Tennent, Semantics of Programming Languages, Prentice-Hall: Hemel Hempstead, UK, 1991.Google Scholar
  32. 32.
    Toulmin, S.E. 1976Knowing and Acting: An Invitation to PhilosophyMacmillanNew York, NY, USAGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Walton, D. N. 1998The New Dialectic: Conversational Contexts of ArgumentUniversity of Toronto PressToronto, Ontario, CanadaGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Walton, D. N., Krabbe, E. C. W. 1995Commitment in Dialogue: Basic Concepts of Interpersonal ReasoningSUNY PressAlbany, NY, USAGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Wooldridge, M. J. 2000Reasoning about Rational AgentsMIT PressCambridge, MA, USAGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Yuan, T. 2004Human Computer Debate a Computational Dialectics Approach PhD thesisLeeds Metropolitan UniversityLeeds UKGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, Inc. 2005

Authors and Affiliations

  • Katie Atkinson
    • 1
  • Trevor Bench-Capon
    • 1
  • Peter Mcburney
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Computer ScienceUniversity of LiverpoolLiverpoolUK

Personalised recommendations