Advertisement

Agent Dialogue as Partial Argumentation and Its Fixpoint Semantics

(Extended Abstract)
  • Takayoshi Suzuki
  • Hajime Sawamura
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 5044)

Abstract

Dialogue and argumentation are basic components of MAS [10], and many models for them have been studied so far (e. g., [3], [8] for argumentation, and [6], [9], [5], [2] for dialogue systems). Those two are closely related to each other [13], and apparently the latter seems to be a special case of the former or one aspect of dialogue. However, it is not so clear how they are related to each other or simply how dialogue is different from argumentation. In this paper, we will consider an intrinsic relationship between them from a formal perspective.

Keywords

Argumentation dialogue agreement fixpoint semantics 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    Amgoud, L., Cayrol, C.: A reasoning model based on the production of acceptable arguments. Annals of Mathematics and Artificial Intelligence 34, 197–215 (2002)MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Amgoud, L., Maudet, N., Parsons, S.: Modeling dialogues using argumentation. In: ICMAS, pp. 31–38 (2000)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Chesñevar, C.I., Maguitman, G., Loui, R.P.: Logical models of argument. ACM Computing Surveys 32, 337–383 (2000)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Dung, P.M.: On the acceptability of arguments and its fundamental role in nonmonotonic reasoning, logic programming and n-person games. Artificial Intelligence 77, 321–358 (1995)MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    McBurney, P., Parsons, S.: Risk agoras: Dialectical argumentation for scientific reasoning. In: Proceedings of the 16th Conference on Uncertainty in Artificial Intelligence (UAI 2000), pp. 371–379 (2000)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Parsons, S., Wooldridge, M., Amgoud, L.: Properties and complexity of some formal inter-agent dialogues. J. Logic Computat 13(3) (2003)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Prakken, H., Sartor, G.: Argument-based extended logic programming with defeasible priorities. J. of Applied Non-Classical Logics 7, 25–75 (1997)MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Prakken, H., Vreeswijk, G.: Logical systems for defeasible argumentation. In: Gabbay, D., Guenther, F. (eds.) Handbook of Philosophical Logic, pp. 219–318. Kluwer, Dordrecht (2002)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Reed, C.: Dialogue frames in agent communication. In: Proceedings of the 3rd International Conference on Multi Agent Systems (ICMAS 1998), pp. 246–253 (1998)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Reed, C., Norman, T.J. (eds.): Argumentation Machines. Kluwer Academic Publishers, Dordrecht (2004)zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Suzuki, T.: Agent dialogue as partial argumentation and its fixpoint semantics. Master Thesis, Niigata University (2007) (in Japanese)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Takahashi, T., Sawamura, H.: A logic of multiple-valued argumentation. In: Proceedings of the Third International Joint Conference on Autono mous Agents and Multi Agent Systems (AAMAS 2004), pp. 800–807. ACM, New York (2005)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Walton, D.: The New Dialectic: Conversational Contexts of Argument. Univ. of Toronto Press (1998)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2009

Authors and Affiliations

  • Takayoshi Suzuki
    • 1
  • Hajime Sawamura
    • 2
  1. 1.Graduate School of Science and TechnologyNiigata UniversityNiigataJapan
  2. 2.Institute of Natural Science and Technology, Academic AssemblyNiigata UniversityNiigataJapan

Personalised recommendations