Properties and Complexity of Some Formal Inter-agent Dialogues

DOI10.1093/LOGCOM/13.3.347MaRDI QIDQ4444965zbMATH OpenOpenAlexFDO

Authors Simon Parsons, M. J. Wooldridge, Leila Amgoud

Publication date 28 January 2004

Published in Journal Of Logic And Computation (Search for Journal in Brave)

Full work available at URL https://doi.org/10.1093/logcom/13.3.347

zbMATH Keywords

inconsistent knowledge baseinter-agent dialogue

Mathematics Subject Classification ID

Logic in computer science (03B70) Logic in artificial intelligence (68T27)

Review text

This paper discusses the properties and complexity of some formal inter-agent dialogues. The agents are envisaged as having access to a possibly inconsistent knowledge base \(\Sigma\) which is not deductively closed. The participants use subsets of \(\Sigma\) to support their assertions: a set \(H\subset \Sigma\) supports a statement \(h\) just in case \(H\) is consistent, \(H\vdash h\), and \(H\) is minimal (i.e., there is no proper subset \(H'\) of \(H\) such that \(H'\) supports \(h\)). The way this is handled means that all \(q\in \Sigma\) are supported by \(\Sigma\), in that \(\{q\}\) supports \(q\). This is congruent with the paper's stipulation that there is no retract locution. Further, the paper requires reliability, that is that an agent asserts only propositions that it would accept itself. This neglects a crucial feature of arguments, namely the possibility of arguing from one's interlocutor's premisses.

Recommendations

• Argumentation in Multi-Agent Systems
• Argumentation Based Modelling of Embedded Agent Dialogues
• On the Relevance of Utterances in Formal Inter-agent Dialogues
• Towards an Extensible Argumentation System
• How Agents Alter Their Beliefs After an Argumentation-Based Dialogue

Cited in

(25)

• Argumentation in artificial intelligence
• An executable specification of a formal argumentation protocol
• The carneades model of argument and burden of proof
• Encoding deductive argumentation in quantified Boolean formulae
• A characterization of types of support between structured arguments and their relationship with support in abstract argumentation
• Augmenting tractable fragments of abstract argumentation
• Computational complexity of flat and generic assumption-based argumentation, with and without probabilities
• Self-stabilizing defeat status computation: dealing with conflict management in multi-agent systems
• Towards verification of dialogue protocols: a mathematical model
• Backdoors to satisfaction
• Complexity Classifications for Logic-Based Argumentation
• A Formal General Setting for Dialogue Protocols
• New Types of Inter-agent Dialogues
• Logical limits of abstract argumentation frameworks
• A general framework for sound assumption-based argumentation dialogues
• Argumentation framework based on evidence theory
• Approximating agreements in formal argumentation dialogues
• How to deal with unbelievable assertions
• A Generalization of Dung’s Abstract Framework for Argumentation: Arguing with Sets of Attacking Arguments
• A Persuasion Dialog for Gaining Access to Information
• Parameterized Complexity of Logic-based Argumentation in Schaefer’s Framework
• Instantiating abstract argumentation with classical logic arguments: postulates and properties
• Algorithms and complexity results for persuasive argumentation
• Algorithms for generating arguments and counterarguments in propositional logic
• Attack principles in sequent-based argumentation theory

This page was built for publication: Properties and Complexity of Some Formal Inter-agent Dialogues

Report a bug (only for logged in users!)Click here to report a bug for this page (MaRDI item Q4444965)