Argumentation in the Framework of Deliberation Dialogue

نویسندگان

  • Douglas Walton
  • Katie Atkinson
  • Trevor Bench-Capon
  • Adam Wyner
  • Dan Cartwright
چکیده

According to argumentation theory, reasoning takes place in different types of dialogue: persuasion dialogue, negotiation, deliberation, information-seeking dialogue, inquiry, and eristic dialogue. These different dialogue types may be nested within one another. Current research in artificial intelligence is building formal models corresponding to each of these types of dialogue and showing how they can be implemented in, for example, multi-agent communications systems. In this paper, we (1) clarify the distinction between deliberation dialogue and persuasion dialogue, (2) survey some recent research in artificial intelligence studying formal properties of deliberation dialogue, (3) present a model of argumentation in deliberation dialogue that has proved to be useful in electronic democracy, and (4) argue that this model provides an attractive alternative to the dominant cost-benefit model of rational argumentation traditionally accepted in economics and other fields as the basis for evaluating argumentation of the kind used in policy decision making.

برای دانلود رایگان متن کامل این مقاله و بیش از 32 میلیون مقاله دیگر ابتدا ثبت نام کنید

ثبت نام

اگر عضو سایت هستید لطفا وارد حساب کاربری خود شوید

منابع مشابه

Modeling Lateral Communication in Holonic Multi Agent Systems

Agents, in a multi agent system, communicate with each other through the process of exchanging messages which is called dialogue. Multi agent organization is generally used to optimize agents’ communications. Holonic organization demonstrates a self-similar recursive and hierarchical structure in which each holon may include some other holons. In a holonic system, lateral communication occurs b...

متن کامل

Testing the benfits of structured argumentation in multi-agent deliberation dialogues

Work on argumentation-based dialogue systems often assumes that the adoption of argumentation leads to improved efficiency and effectiveness. Several studies have taken an experimental approach to prove these alleged benefits, but none has so far supported the expressiveness of a logic for structured argumentation. This paper shows how the use of argumentation in deliberation dialogues can be t...

متن کامل

Testing the benefits of structured argumentation in multi-agent deliberation dialogues

Work on argumentation-based dialogue systems often assumes that the adoption of argumentation leads to improved dialogue efficiency and effectiveness. Several studies have taken an experimental approach to prove these alleged benefits, but none has yet supported the expressiveness of a structured argumentation logic. This paper shows how the use of argumentation in deliberation style dialogues ...

متن کامل

Practical Reasoning and Proposing: Tools for e-Democracy

It is shown how two tools developed in argumentation theory are useful for AI systems for electronic democracy [2,3] and more generally for formal dialogue systems representing deliberation. The novel part of this analysis is that it represents the speech of proposing as a small dialogue exchange in which one party practically reasons with another, based on premises that both are committed to, ...

متن کامل

The eightfold way of deliberation dialogue

Deliberation dialogues occur when two or more participants seek to jointly agree an action or a course of action in some situation. We present the first formal framework for such dialogues, grounding it in a theory of deliberative reasoning from the philosophy of argumentation. We further fully articulate the locutions and rules of a formal dialogue game for this model, so as to specify a proto...

متن کامل

ذخیره در منابع من


  با ذخیره ی این منبع در منابع من، دسترسی به آن را برای استفاده های بعدی آسان تر کنید

عنوان ژورنال:

دوره   شماره 

صفحات  -

تاریخ انتشار 2010