Name
Abstract | ||
|---|---|---|
This paper describes a method for decision making using argumentation. The method is intended to produce the decision considered most likely to promote the agent's ams ans aspirations. First, the problem situation is formulated in terms of an Action-Based Alternating Transition System, representing the actions available to the agents relevant to the situation, and their consequences, taking into account the possible effects of the choices of the other relevant agents. Next, arguments are constructed by instantiating an argumentation scheme designed to justify actions in terms of the values they promote and subjecting these instantiations to a series of critical questions to identify possible counter arguments. The resulting arguments are then organized into a Value-Based Argumentation Framework (VAF), so that a set of arguments acceptable to the agent can be identified. Finally the agent must select one of the acceptable actions to execute. The methodology is illustrated through the use of a detailed case study. |
Year | Venue | Keywords |
|---|---|---|
2008 | COMMA | ams ans aspiration,value-based argumentation framework,critical question,argumentation scheme,problem situation,relevant agent,action-based alternating transition,possible counter argument,acceptable action,possible effect,applications,action selection |
Field | DocType | Volume |
Transition system,Argumentation framework,Computer science,Argumentation theory,Knowledge management,Artificial intelligence,Action selection | Conference | 172 |
ISSN | Citations | PageRank |
0922-6389 | 12 | 0.79 |
References | Authors | |
7 | 3 | |
Name | Order | Citations | PageRank |
|---|---|---|---|
| Fahd Saud Nawwab | 1 | 24 | 1.82 |
| Trevor Bench-Capon | 2 | 535 | 42.78 |
| Paul E. Dunne | 3 | 1700 | 112.42 |