Resolving Conflicts Among Principles: Ranking, Balancing, and Specifying
نویسندگان
چکیده
منابع مشابه
Identifying and Resolving Conflicts among Agents with Hierarchical Plans
Agents can use negotiation techniques to resolve conflicts over limited resources so that they can achieve their goals. The individual plans of agents provide the necessary information for discovering and resolving such conflicts. Conflicts can be avoided by reducing or eliminating interactions by localizing plan effects to particular agents and by merging/coordinating the individual plans of a...
متن کاملResolving Conflicts Among Actions in Concurrent Behaviors: Learning to Coordinate
A robotic agent must coordinate its coupled concurrent behaviors to produce a coherent response to stimuli. Reinforcement learning has been used extensively in coordinating sensing to acting of a single behavior and it has been shown useful in loosely coupled concurrent behaviors. We present a technique for applying Q values developed in learning individual behaviors for coordination among coup...
متن کاملResolving Conflicts among Stakeholders in Real-time Operations
Planning, scheduling, and control decisions often involve conflicting priorities from multiple stakeholders (e.g., due to different perceptions of risk). We present a new framework for multi-stakeholder optimization to compute optimal compromise solutions among stakeholders. In this setting, stakeholder opinions are interpreted as random variables, establishing a parallel between stochastic and...
متن کاملResolving Conflicts in Action Descriptions
We study resolving conflicts between an action description and a set of conditions (possibly obtained from observations), in the context of action languages. In this formal framework, the meaning of an action description can be represented by a transition diagram—a directed graph whose nodes correspond to states and whose edges correspond to transitions describing action occurrences. This allow...
متن کاملOn resolving Conflicts between Arguments
Argument systems are based on the idea that one can construct arguments for propositions structured reasons justifying the belief in a proposition. Using defeasible rules, arguments need not be valid in all circumstances, therefore, it might be possible to construct an argument for a proposition as well as its negation. When arguments support conflicting propositions, one of the arguments must ...
متن کاملذخیره در منابع من
با ذخیره ی این منبع در منابع من، دسترسی به آن را برای استفاده های بعدی آسان تر کنید
ژورنال
عنوان ژورنال: Kennedy Institute of Ethics Journal
سال: 1995
ISSN: 1086-3249
DOI: 10.1353/ken.0.0138