Argumentation Schemes for Collaborative Planning
We address the collaborative planning problem among agents where they have different objectives and norms. In this context, agreeing on the best course of action to adopt represents a significant challenge. Concurrent actions and causal plan-constraints may lead to conflicts of opinion on what to do. Moreover, individual norms can constrain agent behaviour. We propose an argumentation-based model for deliberative dialogues based on argumentation schemes. This model facilitates agreements about joint plans by enriching the quality of the dialogue through the exchange of relevant information about plan commitments and norms.
KeywordsArgumentation schemes Practical reasoning Planning
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
- 3.Bench-Capon, T., Atkinson, K.: Action-state semantics for practical reasoning. In: Proceeding of the Fall Symposium on the Uses of Computational Argument (2009)Google Scholar
- 6.Oren, N., Luck, M., Miles, S., Norman, T.J.: An argumentation inspired heuristic for resolving normative conflict. In: Proceedings of the Fifth Workshop on Coordination, Organizations, Institutions and Norms in Agent Systems (2008)Google Scholar
- 8.Rahwan, I., Amgoud, L.: An argumentation-based approach for practical reasoning. In: Proceedings of the Fifth International Joint Conference on Autonomous Agents and Multiagent Systems, pp. 347–354 (2007)Google Scholar
- 9.Reiter, R.: Knowledge in Action: Logical Foundations for Specifying and Implementing Dynamical Systems. MIT Press (2001)Google Scholar
- 10.Walton, D.N.: Argumentation schemes for presumptive reasoning. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates (1996)Google Scholar