Skip to main content

Shift from Forward to Backward Deliberation in Search of Reconciliation

  • Conference paper
PRICAI 2014: Trends in Artificial Intelligence (PRICAI 2014)

Part of the book series: Lecture Notes in Computer Science ((LNAI,volume 8862))

Included in the following conference series:

  • 6323 Accesses

Abstract

Desire conflicts arise in several real-world contexts. In this paper we propose a mixed deliberation dialogue for reconciliation. A mixed deliberation dialogue is defined as a combination of forward and backward deliberation dialogues whose goals are subordinate and superordinate desires of a given desire, respectively. This research and the introduction of mixed deliberation dialogue have been motivated by Kowalski and Toni’s reconciliatory scenario: indeed we show that an instantiation of a mixed deliberation dialogue implements key parts of Kowalski and Toni’s reconciliatory solution. We also proved the correctness of the mixed deliberation dialogues.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 84.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 109.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  • Bench-Capon, T.J.M., Prakken, H.: Justifying actions by accruing arguments. In: Proc. of the 1st International Conference on Computational Models of Argument, pp. 247–258 (2006)

    Google Scholar 

  • 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)

    Article  MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  • Fan, X., Toni, F.: Argumentation dialogues for two-agent conflict resolution. In: Proc. of the 4th International Conference on Computational Models of Argument, pp. 249–260 (2012)

    Google Scholar 

  • Hamblin, C.L.: Fallacies. Methuen (1970)

    Google Scholar 

  • Hintikka, J.: Language-Games for Quantifiers. In: American Philosohpical Quarterly Monograph series 2: studies in logical theory edition, pp. 46–72. Blackwell, Oxford (1968)

    Google Scholar 

  • Hitchcock, D., McBurney, P., Parsons, S.: A framework for deliberation dialogues. In: Proc. of the 4th Biennial Conference of the Ontario Society for the Study of Argumentation, pp. 1–24 (2001)

    Google Scholar 

  • Kido, H., Ohsawa, Y.: Justifying underlying desires for argument-based reconciliation. In: Black, E., Modgil, S., Oren, N. (eds.) TAFA 2013. LNCS (LNAI), vol. 8306, pp. 143–157. Springer, Heidelberg (2014)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Kok, E.M., Meyer, J.J.C., Prakken, H., Vreeswijk, G.A.W.: A formal argumentation framework for deliberation dialogues. In: Proc. of the 7th International Workshop on Argumentation in Multi-Agent Systems, pp. 31–48 (2010)

    Google Scholar 

  • Kowalski, R.A., Toni, F.: Argument and reconciliation. In: Proc. of the 5th Generation Computer Systems Workshop on Application of Logic Programming to Legal Reasoning, pp. 9–16 (1994)

    Google Scholar 

  • Lorenzen, P.: Ein dialogisches konstruktivitätskriterium. infinitistic methods edition, pp. 193–200. Pergamon, Oxford (1961)

    Google Scholar 

  • McBurney, P., Hitchcock, D., Parsons, S.: The eightfold way of deliberation dialogue. International Journal of Intelligent Systems 22(1), 95–132 (2007)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Prakken, H.: Coherence and flexibility in dialogue games for argumentation. Journal of Logic and Computation 15, 1009–1040 (2005)

    Article  MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  • Prakken, H.: Formal systems for persuasion dialogue. The Knowledge Engineering Review 21(2), 163–188 (2006)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rahwan, I., Pasquier, P., Sonenberg, L., Dignum, F.: On the benefits of exploiting underlying goals in argument-based negotiation. In: Proc. of the 22nd National Conference on Artificial Intelligence (AAAI 2007), pp. 116–121 (2007)

    Google Scholar 

  • van Eemeren, F.H., Grootendorst, R., Henkemans, F.S.: Fundamentals of Argumentation Theory: A Handbook of Historical Backgrounds and Contemporary Developments. Routledge (1996)

    Google Scholar 

  • Wells, S., Reed, C.: Knowing when to bargain. In: Proc. of the 1st International Conference on Computational Models of Argument, pp. 235–246 (2006)

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2014 Springer International Publishing Switzerland

About this paper

Cite this paper

Kido, H., Cerutti, F. (2014). Shift from Forward to Backward Deliberation in Search of Reconciliation. In: Pham, DN., Park, SB. (eds) PRICAI 2014: Trends in Artificial Intelligence. PRICAI 2014. Lecture Notes in Computer Science(), vol 8862. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-13560-1_79

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-13560-1_79

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-319-13559-5

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-319-13560-1

  • eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics