ASBO: Argumentation System Based on Ontologies

Conflicts are unavoidable in open distributed systems. Belief or semantic conflicts are of special interest in multiagent systems, where agents need to communicate by exchanging knowledge. A common approach to deal with conflicts is the use of argumentation-based negotiation processes. There have been much work in the argumentation research arena. Amongst the outcomes of this research, some generic argumentation frameworks for handling inconsistences can be found, together with several persuasion dialogue systems. The goal of this paper is to contribute in advancing the state-of-art in argumentation by extending the basic mechanisms used in conventional argumentation frameworks. This contribution consists of a new and convenient style of attack to arguments and making explicit the argumentation process structure through an OWL-based ontology. Main benefits of this research are twofold. Firstly, the availability of a more realistic framework thanks to the definition of the new attack. Secondly, to enable automatic reasoning about the argumentation process itself. To illustrate this approach, we expose a persuasive argumentation scenario based on a real situation.

[1]  Milind Tambe,et al.  Intelligent Agents VIII , 2002, Lecture Notes in Computer Science.

[2]  Phan Minh Dung,et al.  An Abstract, Argumentation-Theoretic Approach to Default Reasoning , 1997, Artif. Intell..

[3]  Moshe Tennenholtz,et al.  On Social Laws for Artificial Agent Societies: Off-Line Design , 1995, Artif. Intell..

[4]  Diego Calvanese,et al.  The Description Logic Handbook: Theory, Implementation, and Applications , 2003, Description Logic Handbook.

[5]  Henry Prakken,et al.  From logic to dialectics in legal argument , 1995, ICAIL '95.

[6]  John L. Pollock,et al.  Rational Cognition in OSCAR , 1999, ATAL.

[7]  Peter McBurney,et al.  Argumentation-Based Communication between Agents , 2003, Communication in Multiagent Systems.

[8]  Jadwiga Indulska,et al.  Methods for conflict resolution in policy-based management systems , 2003, Seventh IEEE International Enterprise Distributed Object Computing Conference, 2003. Proceedings..

[9]  Félix J. García Clemente,et al.  Solving Conflicts in Agent-Based Ubiquitous Computing Systems: A Proposal Based on Argumentation , 2009 .

[10]  John Fox,et al.  Arguments, Contradicitions and Practical Reasoning , 1992, ECAI.

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

[12]  Jeffrey S. Rosenschein and Gilad Zlotkin Rules of Encounter , 1994 .

[13]  Simon Parsons,et al.  Agent Dialogues with Conflicting Preferences , 2001, ATAL.

[14]  Nicholas R. Jennings,et al.  Intelligent agents VI : agent theories, architectures, and languages : 6th International Workshop, ATAL '99, Orlando, Florida, USA, July 15-17, 1999 : proceedings , 2000 .

[15]  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..

[16]  Henry Prakken,et al.  DOI: 10.1017/S000000000000000 Printed in the United Kingdom Formal systems for persuasion dialogue , 2022 .

[17]  Nicholas R. Jennings,et al.  Agents That Reason and Negotiate by Arguing , 1998, J. Log. Comput..

[18]  H. Lan,et al.  SWRL : A semantic Web rule language combining OWL and ruleML , 2004 .

[19]  Frank van Harmelen,et al.  Web Ontology Language: OWL , 2004, Handbook on Ontologies.

[20]  Victor R. Lesser,et al.  Cooperative Multiagent Systems: A Personal View of the State of the Art , 1999, IEEE Trans. Knowl. Data Eng..

[21]  J. Pollock Cognitive Carpentry: A Blueprint for How to Build a Person , 1995 .

[22]  Guillermo Ricardo Simari,et al.  Defeasible logic programming: an argumentative approach , 2003, Theory and Practice of Logic Programming.

[23]  Nicholas R. Jennings,et al.  Neogotiation Through Argumentation - A Preliminary Report , 1996 .

[24]  David Stuart Robertson,et al.  Argument-based applications to knowledge engineering , 2000, The Knowledge Engineering Review.

[25]  Jon Doyle,et al.  A Truth Maintenance System , 1979, Artif. Intell..

[26]  Henry Prakken,et al.  A dialectical model of assessing conflicting arguments in legal reasoning , 1996, Artificial Intelligence and Law.

[27]  Jeffrey S. Rosenschein,et al.  Rules of Encounter - Designing Conventions for Automated Negotiation among Computers , 1994 .