Shift from Forward to Backward Deliberation in Search of Reconciliation

  • Hiroyuki Kido
  • Federico Cerutti
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 8862)


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.


Argumentation Framework Persuasion Dialogue Resource Committee Collaborative Theory Practical Syllogism 
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.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 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
  2. 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)CrossRefMATHMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  3. 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
  4. Hamblin, C.L.: Fallacies. Methuen (1970)Google Scholar
  5. 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
  6. 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
  7. 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)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 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
  9. 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
  10. Lorenzen, P.: Ein dialogisches konstruktivitätskriterium. infinitistic methods edition, pp. 193–200. Pergamon, Oxford (1961)Google Scholar
  11. McBurney, P., Hitchcock, D., Parsons, S.: The eightfold way of deliberation dialogue. International Journal of Intelligent Systems 22(1), 95–132 (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Prakken, H.: Coherence and flexibility in dialogue games for argumentation. Journal of Logic and Computation 15, 1009–1040 (2005)CrossRefMATHMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  13. Prakken, H.: Formal systems for persuasion dialogue. The Knowledge Engineering Review 21(2), 163–188 (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 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
  15. 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
  16. 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

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2014

Authors and Affiliations

  • Hiroyuki Kido
    • 1
  • Federico Cerutti
    • 2
  1. 1.School of EngineeringThe University of TokyoJapan
  2. 2.Department of Computing ScienceThe University of AberdeenUK

Personalised recommendations