Decision making amounts to define a preorder (usually a complete one) on a set of options. Argumentation has been introduced in decision making analysis. In particular, an argument-based decision system has been proposed recently by Amgoud et al. The system is a variant of Dung’s abstract framework. It takes as input a set of options, different arguments and a defeat relation among them, and returns as outputs a status for each option, and a total preorder on the set of options. The status is defined on the basis of the acceptability of their supporting arguments.

The aim of this paper is to study the revision of this decision system in light of a new argument. We will study under which conditions an option may change its status when a new argument is received and under which conditions this new argument is useless. This amounts to study how the acceptability of arguments evolves when the decision system is extended by new arguments.


Decision System Option Status Argumentation Framework Argumentation System Acceptable Option 


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    Amgoud, L., Dimopoulos, Y., Moraitis, P.: Making decisions through preference-based argumentation. In: Proc. of Int. Conf. on Principles of Knowledge Representation and Reasoning, pp. 113–123. AAAI Press, Menlo Park (2008)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Amgoud, L., Prade, H.: Using arguments for making and explaining decisions. Artificial Intelligence Journal 173, 413–436 (2009)CrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Amgoud, L., Vesic, S.: On revising offer status in argument-based negotiations. IRIT/RR–2009-09–FR (2009), http://www.irit.fr/~Srdjan.Vesic
  4. 4.
    Bonet, B., Geffner, H.: Arguing for decisions: A qualitative model of decision making. In: Proceedings of the 12th Conference on Uncertainty in Artificial Intelligence (UAI 1996), pp. 98–105 (1996)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Cayrol, C., Bannay, F., Lagasquie, M.: Revision of an argumentation system. In: Int. Conf. on Principles of Knowledge Representation and Reasoning, pp. 124–134. AAAI Press, Menlo Park (2008)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    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)CrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Fox, J., Das, S.: Safe and Sound. Artificial Intelligence in Hazardous Applications. AAAI Press/ MIT Press (2000)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2009

Authors and Affiliations

  • Leila Amgoud
    • 1
  • Srdjan Vesic
    • 1
  1. 1.Institut de Recherche en Informatique de ToulouseToulouse Cedex 9France

Personalised recommendations