Towards Formalising Agent Argumentation over the Viability of Human Organs for Transplantation

Modgil, Sanjay; Tolchinsky, Pancho; Cortés, Ulises

doi:10.1007/11579427_95

Cited by 10 publications

(17 citation statements)

References 12 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Arguments in CARREL+ are instantiations of the argument schemes and critical questions of the ASR. The agents build arguments by using the fist order logic programming language proposed in (Modgil et al 2005). Although CBR is not directly used here to generate arguments, the argumentation schemes determine the structure of the dialogue (and hence the possible moves on the argumentation graphs of the case-base).…”

Section: Argument Generation Selection and Evaluationmentioning

confidence: 99%

Applying CBR to manage argumentation in MAS

Heras

Julián

Botti

2010

IJRIS

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The application of argumentation theories and techniques in multi-agent systems has become a prolific area of research. Argumentation allows agents to harmonize two types of disagreement situations: internal, when the acquisition of new information (e.g. about the environment or about other agents) produces incoherences in the agents' mental state; and external, when agents that have different positions about a topic engage in a discussion. The focus of this paper is on the latter type of disagreement situations. In those settings, agents must be able to generate, select and send arguments to other agents that will evaluate them in their turn. An efficient way for agents to manage these argumentation abilities is by using case-based reasoning, which has been successfully applied to argumentation from its earliest beginnings. This reasoning methodology also allows agents to learn from their experiences and therefore, to improve their argumentation skills. This paper analyses the advantages of applying case-based reasoning to manage arguments in multi-agent systems dialogues, identifies open issues and proposes new ideas to tackle them.

show abstract

Section: Argument Generation Selection and Evaluationmentioning

confidence: 99%

Applying CBR to manage argumentation in MAS

Heras

Julián

Botti

2010

IJRIS

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…This repository completely characterizes the space of possible arguments that the agents can submit. Moreover, agents use a first-order logic programming language to generate arguments (Modgil et al ., 2005). When a new organ is offered, the DA submits to the MA its arguments about the organ viability.…”

Section: Research Approaches In Cbr-based Argumentation For Masmentioning

confidence: 99%

Challenges for a CBR framework for argumentation in open MAS

Heras

Botti

Julián

2009

The Knowledge Engineering Review

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Nowadays, Multi-Agent Systems (MAS) are broadening their applications to open environments, where heterogeneous agents could enter into the system, form agents' organisations and interact. The high dynamism of open MAS gives rise to potential conflicts between agents and thus, to a need for a mechanism to reach agreements. Argumentation is a natural way of harmonising conflicts of opinion that has been applied to many disciplines, such as Case-Based Reasoning (CBR) and MAS. Some approaches that apply CBR to manage argumentation in MAS have been proposed in the literature. These improve agents' argumentation skills by allowing them to reason and learn from experiences. In this paper, we have reviewed these approaches and identified the current contributions of the CBR methodology in this area. As a result of this work, we have proposed several open issues that must be taken into consideration to develop a CBR framework that provides the agents of an open MAS with arguing and learning capabilities.

show abstract

“…It lets human agents construct natural language arguments instantiating schemes 10 or lets automated agents construct arguments in a firstorder-logic programming language. 11 (This first-order argumentation has been described elsewhere, where the conflict-based interactions between arguments are also defined. 11 ) Given the constructed arguments instantiating the schemes (in whatever language) and their interactions, we apply Dung's seminal calculus of opposition 12 to determine the justified or winning arguments.…”

Section: The Proclaim Modelmentioning

confidence: 99%