A socio-cognitive model of trust using argumentation theory

Trust is used to minimise the uncertainty in the interactions of the agents especially in case of conflicting information from different sources. Besides conflicts among information there can also be conflicts about the trust attributed to the information sources. In this paper, we discuss how to reason about trust using argumentation theory, so to express also the possibly conflicting motivations about trust and distrust. The methodology of meta-argumentation allows us to model both information and information sources as arguments and to argue about them. First, we present a model for representing evidence provided as motivation of the sources' arguments to represent the need of a trusted source to believe the information, and we show how to model the information sources in a way that it can be argued whether they should be considered trustworthy or not. Second, we provide a focused representation of trust about the sources in which trust concerns not only the sources but also the information items and the relation with other information. Third, we introduce the feedback on the trustworthiness of the sources and the information items they propose, such that an attack to the trustworthiness of the items feeds back on the trustworthiness of the source. Finally, we distinguish two dimensions of trust, namely competence and sincerity, and we present a formal way to express those dimensions, only informally described in the socio-cognitive models of trust.

[1]  Anthony Hunter,et al.  An argument-based approach to reasoning with clinical knowledge , 2009, Int. J. Approx. Reason..

[2]  E. Sklar,et al.  A system of argumentation for reasoning about trust , 2010 .

[3]  Serena Villata,et al.  Changing One ’ s Mind : Erase or Rewind ? Possibilistic Belief Revision with Fuzzy Argumentation based on Trust , 2011 .

[4]  Munindar P. Singh,et al.  Formal Trust Model for Multiagent Systems , 2007, IJCAI.

[5]  Chris Reed,et al.  Argumentation Schemes , 2008 .

[6]  Pietro Baroni,et al.  On principle-based evaluation of extension-based argumentation semantics , 2007, Artif. Intell..

[7]  Emiliano Lorini,et al.  From Binary Trust to Graded Trust in Information Sources: A Logical Perspective , 2008, AAMAS-TRUST.

[8]  Trevor J. M. Bench-Capon,et al.  Metalevel argumentation , 2011, J. Log. Comput..

[9]  Rino Falcone,et al.  Trust Theory: A Socio-Cognitive and Computational Model , 2010 .

[10]  Dirk Vermeir,et al.  Robust Semantics for Argumentation Frameworks , 1999, J. Log. Comput..

[11]  Serena Villata,et al.  Support in Abstract Argumentation , 2010, COMMA.

[12]  Corinna Elsenbroich.  Trust Theory: A Socio-Cognitive and Computational Model (Wiley Series in Agent Technology) by Cristiano Castelfranchi and Rino Falcone , 2011, J. Artif. Soc. Soc. Simul..

[13]  Elizabeth Sklar,et al.  Argumentation-based reasoning in agents with varying degrees of trust , 2011, AAMAS.

[14]  Claudette Cayrol,et al.  Coalitions of arguments: A tool for handling bipolar argumentation frameworks , 2010 .

[15]  Phan Minh Dung,et al.  On the Acceptability of Arguments and its Fundamental Role in Nonmonotonic Reasoning and Logic Programming , 1993, IJCAI.

[16]  Cees Witteveen,et al.  Fuzzy Argumentation for Trust , 2008, CLIMA.

[17]  Pietro Baroni,et al.  AFRA: Argumentation framework with recursive attacks , 2011, Int. J. Approx. Reason..

[18]  Paul-Amaury Matt,et al.  Combining statistics and arguments to compute trust , 2010, AAMAS.

[19]  Jürgen Dix,et al.  Research challenges for argumentation , 2009, Computer Science - Research and Development.

[20]  Alexander Bochman,et al.  A causal approach to nonmonotonic reasoning , 2004, Artif. Intell..

[21]  Serena Villata,et al.  Attack Semantics for Abstract Argumentation , 2011, IJCAI.

[22]  Henri Prade,et al.  A Qualitative Bipolar Argumentative View of Trust , 2007, SUM.

[23]  Serena Villata,et al.  On the Acceptability of Meta-arguments , 2009, 2009 IEEE/WIC/ACM International Joint Conference on Web Intelligence and Intelligent Agent Technology.

[24]  Churn-Jung Liau,et al.  Belief, information acquisition, and trust in multi-agent systems--A modal logic formulation , 2003, Artif. Intell..

[25]  Dov M. Gabbay,et al.  Fibring Argumentation Frames , 2009, Stud Logica.

[26]  Serena Villata,et al.  Meta-Argumentation Modelling I: Methodology and Techniques , 2009, Stud Logica.

[27]  R. Rosenfeld.  Belief , 2012, Otolaryngology--head and neck surgery : official journal of American Academy of Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery.

[28]  Elizabeth Sklar,et al.  Reasoning about Trust Using Argumentation: A Position Paper , 2010, ArgMAS.

[29]  Sébastien Konieczny,et al.  On the merging of Dung's argumentation systems , 2007, Artif. Intell..

[30]  Serena Villata,et al.  Changing One's Mind: Erase or Rewind? , 2011, IJCAI.

[31]  Cristiano Castelfranchi,et al.  Representation and Integration of Multiple Knowledge Sources: Issues and Questions , 1997 .

[32]  Henry Prakken,et al.  An abstract framework for argumentation with structured arguments , 2010, Argument Comput..

[33]  Henry Prakken,et al.  The Carneades model of argument and burden of proof , 2007, Artif. Intell..

[34]  Claudette Cayrol,et al.  Coalitions of arguments: A tool for handling bipolar argumentation frameworks , 2010, Int. J. Intell. Syst..

[35]  Diego Gambetta.  Trust : making and breaking cooperative relations , 1992 .

[36]  Serena Villata,et al.  Arguing about the Trustworthiness of the Information Sources , 2011, ECSQARU.