On an Argument-centric Persuasion Framework

In this paper, we propose an argument-centric persuasion framework. We first introduce a decision problem, called persuasion satisfiability, which is defined as the problem of determining whether there exists a sequence of arguments that starts from a given initial state, such as beliefs or wishes of the persuadee, and allows for achieving a given purpose of the persuader. This sequence should satisfy different constraints, including particularly upper bound constraints on the weight as well as on the length. We show that this decision problem is NP-complete and propose an encoding in partial weighted MaxSAT framework for solving it. Then, we show that the proposed encoding offers flexibility for dealing with different variants of the persuasion satisfiability problem. Finally, to avoid the explicit use of upper bound constraints on the weight and the length, we consider the notion of Pareto optimality by proposing an approach based on the use of partial weighted MaxSAT, which allows for finding non dominated (optimal) solutions.

[1]  Anthony Hunter,et al.  Learning and Updating User Models for Subpopulations in Persuasive Argumentation Using Beta Distributions , 2018, AAMAS.

[2]  Nico Potyka,et al.  Updating Probabilistic Epistemic States in Persuasion Dialogues , 2017, ECSQARU.

[3]  Anthony Hunter,et al.  Optimization of dialectical outcomes in dialogical argumentation , 2016, Int. J. Approx. Reason..

[4]  M. Beeson.  Foundations of Constructive Mathematics: Metamathematical Studies , 1985 .

[5]  Anthony Hunter,et al.  Towards a framework for computational persuasion with applications in behaviour change , 2018, Argument Comput..

[6]  Phan Minh Dung,et al.  On the Acceptability of Arguments and its Fundamental Role in Nonmonotonic Reasoning, Logic Programming and n-Person Games , 1995, Artif. Intell..

[7]  Leila Amgoud,et al.  An Axiomatic Approach for Persuasion Dialogs , 2013, 2013 IEEE 25th International Conference on Tools with Artificial Intelligence.

[8]  Anthony Hunter,et al.  Elements of Argumentation , 2007, ECSQARU.

[9]  A. Troelstra,et al.  Constructivism in Mathematics: An Introduction , 1988 .

[10]  Simon Parsons,et al.  Arguments, Dialogue, and Negotiation , 2000, ECAI.

[11]  Niklas Sörensson,et al.  Translating Pseudo-Boolean Constraints into SAT , 2006, J. Satisf. Boolean Model. Comput..

[12]  B. J. Fogg,et al.  Persuasive computers: perspectives and research directions , 1998, CHI.

[13]  Anthony Hunter,et al.  Computational Persuasion with Applications in Behaviour Change , 2016, COMMA.

[14]  Carsten Sinz,et al.  Towards an Optimal CNF Encoding of Boolean Cardinality Constraints , 2005, CP.

[15]  Nicolas Maudet,et al.  On the outcomes of multiparty persuasion , 2011, AAMAS.

[16]  Anthony Hunter,et al.  Modelling the Persuadee in Asymmetric Argumentation Dialogues for Persuasion , 2015, IJCAI.

[17]  Anthony Hunter,et al.  Domain Modelling in Computational Persuasion for Behaviour Change in Healthcare , 2018, ArXiv.

[18]  Anthony Hunter,et al.  Strategic Sequences of Arguments for Persuasion Using Decision Trees , 2017, AAAI.

[19]  Philippe Besnard,et al.  Logical limits of abstract argumentation frameworks , 2013, J. Appl. Non Class. Logics.

[20]  Anthony Hunter.  Opportunities for Argument-Centric Persuasion in Behaviour Change , 2014, JELIA.

[21]  Henry Prakken,et al.  Coherence and Flexibility in Dialogue Games for Argumentation , 2005, J. Log. Comput..

[22]  Simon Parsons,et al.  Modelling dialogues using argumentation , 2000, Proceedings Fourth International Conference on MultiAgent Systems.

[23]  Olivier Roussel,et al.  New Encodings of Pseudo-Boolean Constraints into CNF , 2009, SAT.

[24]  Anthony Hunter,et al.  Empirical Methods for Modelling Persuadees in Dialogical Argumentation , 2017, 2017 IEEE 29th International Conference on Tools with Artificial Intelligence (ICTAI).