Advertisement

Some Thoughts on Using Argumentation to Handle Trust

(Invited Talk)
  • Simon Parsons
  • Yuqing Tang
  • Kai Cai
  • Elizabeth Sklar
  • Peter McBurney
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 6814)

Abstract

This paper describes some of our recent work on using argumentation to handle information about trust. We first discuss the importance of trust in computer science in general and in multi-agent systems in particular. We then describe the setting of our work, situating it within the broad area of work on trust. Next we provide an overview of two lines of work we are currently pursuing — using argumentation to reason about which individuals to trust, and using argumentation to relate sources of information to conclusions drawn from information provided by those sources. Finally, we outline our current initiatives and briefly highlight other work that is closely related to ours.

Keywords

Multiagent System Online Social Network Trust Propagation Reputation System Trust Network 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    Abrams, Z., McGrew, R., Plotkin, S.: Keeping peers honest in EigenTrust. In: Proceedings of the 2nd Workshop on the Economics of Peer-to-Peer Systems (2004)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Adler, B.T., de Alfaro, L.: A content-driven reputation system for the Wikipedia. In: Proceedings of the 16th International World Wide Web Conference, Banff, Alberta (May 2007)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Artz, D., Gil, Y.: A survey of trust in computer science and the semantic web. Journal of Web Semantics 5(2), 58–71 (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Dong, X.L., Berti-Equille, L., Srivastava, D.: Integrating conflicting data: The role of source dependence. In: Proceedings of the 35th International Conference on Very Large Databases, Lyon, France (August 2009)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Dung, P.M.: On the acceptability of arguments and its fundamental role in nonmonotonic reasoning, logic programming and n-person games. Artificial Intelligence 77, 321–357 (1995)MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Falcone, R., Castelfranchi, C.: Social trust: A cognitive approach. In: Castelfranchi, C., Tan, Y. (eds.) Trust and Deception in Virtual Societies, pp. 55–99. Kluwer Academic Publishers, Dordrecht (2001)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
  8. 8.
    Francone, R., Castelfranchi, C.: Transitivity in trust: A discussed property. In: Proceedings of the Undicesimo Workshop Nazionale ”Dagli Oggetti agli Agenti”, Rimini (September 2010)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    García, A.J., Simari, G.: Defeasible logic programming: an argumentative approach. Theory and Practice of Logic Programming 4(1), 95–138 (2004)MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Golbeck, J.: Combining provenance with trust in social networks for semantic web content filtering. In: Moreau, L., Foster, I. (eds.) IPAW 2006. LNCS, vol. 4145, pp. 101–108. Springer, Heidelberg (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Golbeck, J., Hendler, J.: Filmtrust: Movie recommendations using trust in web-based social networks. In: Proceedings of the IEEE Consumer Communications and Networking Conference (2006)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Grandison, T., Sloman, M.: A survey of trust in internet applications. IEEE Communications Surveys and Tutorials 4(4), 2–16 (2000)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Guha, R., Kumar, R., Raghavan, P., Tomkins, A.: Propagation of trust and distrust. In: Proceedings of the 13th International Conference on the World Wide Web (2004)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Harwood, W.T., Clark, J.A., Jacob, J.L.: Networks of trust and distrust: Towards logical reputation systems. In: Gabbay, D.M., van der Torre,L. (eds.) Logics in Security, Copenhagen, Denmark (2010)Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Harwood, W.T., Clark, J.A., Jacob, J.L.: A perspective on trust, security and autonomous systems. In: Proceedings of the New Security Paradigms Workshop, Concord, MA (2010)Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Hunter, A.: Reasoning about the appropriateness of propoents for arguments. In: Proceedings of the 23rd AAAI Conference on Artificial Intelligence, Chicago, Illinois (July 2008)Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Jøsang, A., Gray, E., Kinateder, M.: Simplification and analysis of transitive trust networks. Web Intelligence and Agent Systems 4(2), 139–161 (2006)Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Judson, P.N., Fox, J., Krause, P.J.: Using new reasoning technology in chemical information systems. Journal of Chemical Information and Computer Sciences 36, 621–624 (1996)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Kamvar, S.D., Schlosser, M.T., Garcia-Molina, H.: The EigenTrust algorithm for reputation management in P2P networks. In: Proceedings of the 12th World Wide Web Conference (May 2004)Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Katz, Y., Golbeck, J.: Social network-based trust in prioritzed default logic. In: Proceedings of the 21st National Conference on Artificial Intelligence (2006)Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Lang, J., Spear, M., Wu, S.F.: Social manipulation of online recommender systems. In: Bolc, L., Makowski, M., Wierzbicki, A. (eds.) SocInfo 2010. LNCS, vol. 6430, pp. 125–139. Springer, Heidelberg (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Lerman, K., Galstyan, A.: Analysis of social voting patterns on Digg. In: Proceedings of the 1st Workshop on Online Social Networks, Seattle (August 2008)Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Liau, C.-J.: Belief, information acquisition, and trust in multi-agent systems — a modal logic formulation. Artificial Intelligence 149, 31–60 (2003)MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Matt, P.-A., Morge, M., Toni, F.: Combining statistics and arguments to compute trust. In: Proceedings of the 9th International Conference on Autonomous Agents and Multiagents Systems, Toronto, Canada (May 2010)Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    McBurney, P., Parsons, S.: Dialectical argumentation for reasoning about chemical carcinogenicity. Logic Journal of the IGPL 9(2), 191–203 (2001)MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Miles, S., Groth, P., Munroe, S., Moreau, L.: PrIMe: A methodology for developing provenance-aware applications. ACM Transactions on Software Engineering and Methodology (2010) (to appear)Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    Page, L., Brin, S., Motwani, R., Winograd, T.: The PageRank citation ranking: Bringing order to the Web. Technical Report 1999-66, Stanford InfoLab (1999)Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    Parsons, S., Haigh, K., Levitt, K., Rowe, J., Singh, M., Sklar, E.: Arguments about trust. Technical report, Collaborative Technology Alliance (2011)Google Scholar
  29. 29.
    Parsons, S., McBurney, P., Sklar, E.: Reasoning about trust using argumentation: A position paper. In: Proceedings of the Workshop on Argumentation in Multiagent Systems, Toronto, Canada (May 2010)Google Scholar
  30. 30.
    Parsons, S., Sklar, E., McBurney, P.: Using argumentation to reason with and about trust. In: Proceedings of the 8th International Workshop on Argumentation in Multiagent Systems, Taipei, Taiwan (2011)Google Scholar
  31. 31.
    Prakken, H.: An abstract framework for argumentation with structured arguments. Argument and Computation 1, 93–124 (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Rajbhandari, S., Wootten, I., Ali, A., Rana, O.F.: Evaluating provenance-based trust for scientific workflows. In: Proceedinsg of the Sixth IEEE International Symposium on Cluster Computing and the Grid, pp. 365–372. IEEE Computer Society Press, Singapore (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Resnick, P., Zeckhauser, R.: Trust among strangers in internet transactions: Empirical analysis of eBay’s reputation system. In: Baye, M.R. (ed.) The Economics of the Internet and E-Commerce, pp. 127–157. Elsevier Science, Amsterdam (2002)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Resnick, P., Zeckhauser, R., Friedman, E., Kuwabara, K.: Reputation systems: Facilitating trust in internet interactions. Communications of the ACM 43, 45–48 (2000)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Sabater, J., Sierra, C.: Review on computational trust and reputation models. AI Review 23(1), 33–60 (2005)zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Stranders, R., de Weerdt, M., Witteveen, C.: Fuzzy argumentation for trust. In: Sadri, F., Satoh, K. (eds.) CLIMA VIII 2007. LNCS (LNAI), vol. 5056, pp. 214–230. Springer, Heidelberg (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Tang, Y., Cai, K., McBurney, P., Sklar, E., Parsons, S.: Using argumentation to reason about trust and belief. Journal of Logic and Computation (to appear, 2011)Google Scholar
  38. 38.
    Tang, Y., Cai, K., Sklar, E., McBurney, P., Parsons, S.: A system of argumentation for reasoning about trust. In: Proceedings of the 8th European Workshop on Multi-Agent Systems, Paris, France (December 2010)Google Scholar
  39. 39.
    Teng, C.-Y., Lauterbach, D., Adamic, L.: I rate you. You rate me. Should we do so publicly? In: Proceedings of the 3rd Workshop on Online Social Networks, Boston (June 2010)Google Scholar
  40. 40.
    Victor, P., Cornelis, C., De Cock, M., Pinheiro da Silva, P.: Towards a provenance-preserving trust model in agent networks. In: Proceedings of the Workshop on Models of Trust for the Web (2006)Google Scholar
  41. 41.
    Wang, X., Govindan, K., Mohapatra, P.: Provenance-based information trustworthiness evaluation in multihop networks. In: Proceedings of the 53rd Annual IEEE Global Communications Conference, Miami, FL (December 2010)Google Scholar
  42. 42.
    Ye, S., Wu, S.F.: Measuring message propagation and social influence on twitter.com. In: Bolc, L., Makowski, M., Wierzbicki, A. (eds.) SocInfo 2010. LNCS, vol. 6430, pp. 216–231. Springer, Heidelberg (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. 43.
    Yin, X., Han, J., Yu, P.S.: Truth discovery with multiple conflicting information providers on the web. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Knowledge and Data Discovery (2007)Google Scholar
  44. 44.
    Zhong, S., Chen, J., Yang, Y.R.: Sprite: A simple cheat-proof, credit-based system for mobile ad-hoc networks. In: Proceedings of the 22nd Annual Joint Conference of the IEEE Computer and Communications Societies (2003)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2011

Authors and Affiliations

  • Simon Parsons
    • 1
    • 2
  • Yuqing Tang
    • 2
  • Kai Cai
    • 2
  • Elizabeth Sklar
    • 1
    • 2
  • Peter McBurney
    • 3
  1. 1.Department of Computer & Information Science, Brooklyn CollegeCity University of New YorkBrooklynUSA
  2. 2.Department of Computer Science, Graduate CenterCity University of New YorkNew YorkUSA
  3. 3.Department of InformaticsKings College LondonUK

Personalised recommendations