skip to content
Models of argument for deliberative dialogue in complex domains Preview this item
ClosePreview this item
Checking...

Models of argument for deliberative dialogue in complex domains

Author: Alice Toniolo; University of Aberdeen. Department of Computing Science.; U.S. Army Research Laboratory.
Publisher: 2013.
Dissertation: Ph. D. Aberdeen University 2013
Edition/Format:   Thesis/dissertation : Thesis/dissertation : Manuscript   Archival Material : EnglishView all editions and formats
Summary:
In dynamic multiagent systems, self-motivated agents pursuing individual goals may interfere with each other's plans. Agents must, therefore, coordinate their plans to resolve dependencies among them. This drives the need for agents to engage in dialogue to decide what to do in collaboration. Agreeing what to do is a complex activity, however, when agents come to an encounter with different objectives and norm  Read more...
Rating:

(not yet rated) 0 with reviews - Be the first.

Subjects
More like this

Find a copy in the library

&AllPage.SpinnerRetrieving; Finding libraries that hold this item...

Details

Material Type: Thesis/dissertation, Manuscript
Document Type: Book, Archival Material
All Authors / Contributors: Alice Toniolo; University of Aberdeen. Department of Computing Science.; U.S. Army Research Laboratory.
OCLC Number: 921223062
Description: 236 leaves ; 31 cm
Responsibility: Alice Toniolo.

Abstract:

In dynamic multiagent systems, self-motivated agents pursuing individual goals may interfere with each other's plans. Agents must, therefore, coordinate their plans to resolve dependencies among them. This drives the need for agents to engage in dialogue to decide what to do in collaboration. Agreeing what to do is a complex activity, however, when agents come to an encounter with different objectives and norm expectations (i.e. societal norms that constrain acceptable behaviour). Argumentation-based models of dialogue support agents in deciding what to do analysing pros/cons for decisions, and enable conflict resolution by revealing structured background information that facilitates the identification of acceptable solutions. Existing models of deliberative dialogue, however, commonly assume that agents have a shared goal, and to date their effectiveness has been shown only through the use of extended examples. In this research, we propose a novel model of argumentation schemes to be integrated in a dialogue for the identification of plan, goal and norm conflicts when agents have individual but interdependent objectives. We empirically evaluate our model within a dynamic system to establish how the information shared with argumentation schemes influence dialogue outcomes. We show that by employing our model of arguments in dialogue, agents achieve more successful agreements. The resolution of conflicts and identification of more feasible interdependent plans is achieved through the sharing of focussed information driven by argumentation schemes. Agents may also consider more important conflicts, or conflicts that cause higher loss of utility if unresolved. We explore the use of strategies for agents to select arguments that are more likely to solve important conflicts.

Reviews

User-contributed reviews
Retrieving GoodReads reviews...
Retrieving DOGObooks reviews...

Tags

Be the first.

Similar Items

Related Subjects:(1)

Confirm this request

You may have already requested this item. Please select Ok if you would like to proceed with this request anyway.

Linked Data


Primary Entity

<http://www.worldcat.org/oclc/921223062> # Models of argument for deliberative dialogue in complex domains
    a schema:Book, pto:Manuscript, schema:CreativeWork, schema:IndividualProduct, bgn:Thesis ;
   bgn:inSupportOf "" ;
   library:oclcnum "921223062" ;
   schema:about <http://experiment.worldcat.org/entity/work/data/2621436083#Topic/multiagent_systems> ; # Multiagent systems
   schema:contributor <http://experiment.worldcat.org/entity/work/data/2621436083#Organization/u_s_army_research_laboratory> ; # U.S. Army Research Laboratory.
   schema:contributor <http://experiment.worldcat.org/entity/work/data/2621436083#Organization/university_of_aberdeen_department_of_computing_science> ; # University of Aberdeen. Department of Computing Science.
   schema:creator <http://experiment.worldcat.org/entity/work/data/2621436083#Person/toniolo_alice> ; # Alice Toniolo
   schema:datePublished "2013" ;
   schema:description "In dynamic multiagent systems, self-motivated agents pursuing individual goals may interfere with each other's plans. Agents must, therefore, coordinate their plans to resolve dependencies among them. This drives the need for agents to engage in dialogue to decide what to do in collaboration. Agreeing what to do is a complex activity, however, when agents come to an encounter with different objectives and norm expectations (i.e. societal norms that constrain acceptable behaviour). Argumentation-based models of dialogue support agents in deciding what to do analysing pros/cons for decisions, and enable conflict resolution by revealing structured background information that facilitates the identification of acceptable solutions. Existing models of deliberative dialogue, however, commonly assume that agents have a shared goal, and to date their effectiveness has been shown only through the use of extended examples. In this research, we propose a novel model of argumentation schemes to be integrated in a dialogue for the identification of plan, goal and norm conflicts when agents have individual but interdependent objectives. We empirically evaluate our model within a dynamic system to establish how the information shared with argumentation schemes influence dialogue outcomes. We show that by employing our model of arguments in dialogue, agents achieve more successful agreements. The resolution of conflicts and identification of more feasible interdependent plans is achieved through the sharing of focussed information driven by argumentation schemes. Agents may also consider more important conflicts, or conflicts that cause higher loss of utility if unresolved. We explore the use of strategies for agents to select arguments that are more likely to solve important conflicts."@en ;
   schema:exampleOfWork <http://worldcat.org/entity/work/id/2621436083> ;
   schema:inLanguage "en" ;
   schema:name "Models of argument for deliberative dialogue in complex domains"@en ;
   schema:productID "921223062" ;
   schema:publication <http://www.worldcat.org/title/-/oclc/921223062#PublicationEvent/2013> ;
   wdrs:describedby <http://www.worldcat.org/title/-/oclc/921223062> ;
    .


Related Entities

<http://experiment.worldcat.org/entity/work/data/2621436083#Organization/u_s_army_research_laboratory> # U.S. Army Research Laboratory.
    a schema:Organization ;
   schema:name "U.S. Army Research Laboratory." ;
    .

<http://experiment.worldcat.org/entity/work/data/2621436083#Organization/university_of_aberdeen_department_of_computing_science> # University of Aberdeen. Department of Computing Science.
    a schema:Organization ;
   schema:name "University of Aberdeen. Department of Computing Science." ;
    .

<http://experiment.worldcat.org/entity/work/data/2621436083#Person/toniolo_alice> # Alice Toniolo
    a schema:Person ;
   schema:familyName "Toniolo" ;
   schema:givenName "Alice" ;
   schema:name "Alice Toniolo" ;
    .


Content-negotiable representations

Close Window

Please sign in to WorldCat 

Don't have an account? You can easily create a free account.