Defeasible Argumentation Support for an Extended BDI Architecture
نویسندگان
چکیده
In this work, an agent architecture that combines defeasible argumentation and the BDI model is described. Argumentation will be used as a mechanism for reasoning about beliefs, for filtering desires considering the agent’s current environment, and for selecting proper intentions. The approach allows to define different types of agents and this will affect the way in which desires are filtered and hence, which intention is selected. For performing defeasible reasoning, the approach uses a concrete framework based on a working defeasible argumentation system: Defeasible Logic Programming (DeLP). A set of filtering rules, represented as a defeasible logic program, will be used to represent reasons for and against adopting desires. Thus, based on its perceived or derived beliefs, the agent will argue about which of its desires are achievable in the current situation. To clarify the ideas two applications will be introduced to show two significantly different types of agent that can be implemented using this approach.
منابع مشابه
A Framework for Multi-criteria Argumentation-Based Decision Making within a BDI Agent
The BDI model, as a practical reasoning architecture aims at making decisions about what to do based on cognitives notions as beliefs, desires and intentions. However, during the decision making process, BDI agents also have to make background decisions like choosing what intention to achieve next from a set of possibly conflicting desires; which plan to execute from among the plans that satisf...
متن کاملMulti-criteria Argumentation-Based Decision Making within a BDI Agent
The BDI model, as a practical reasoning architecture aims at making decisions about what to do based on cognitives notions as beliefs, desires and intentions. However, during the decision making process, BDI agents also have to make background decisions like choosing what intention to achieve next from a set of possibly conflicting desires; which plan to execute from among the plans that satisf...
متن کاملAn approach to integrate web services and argumentation into a BDI system
Intelligent agents have to be provided with different skills and technological resources in order to deal with highly changing environments, uncertain, incomplete and potentially inconsistent information and bounded computational resources. BDI architectures, argumentation-based techniques and recent technologies like web services have been incorporated in the design of intelligent agents to ad...
متن کاملA characterization of collective conflict for defeasible argumentation
In this paper we define a recursive semantics for warrant in a general defeasible argumentation framework by formalizing a notion of collective (non-binary) conflict among arguments. This allows us to ensure direct and indirect consistency (in the sense of Caminada and Amgoud) without distinguishing between direct and indirect conflicts. Then, the general defeasible argumentation framework is e...
متن کاملArgumentation with Defeasible Conditionals: a Preliminary Report (extended Abstract)
This paper investigates the relation between logics for defeasible conditionals and systems for defeasible argumentation. Starting from the assumption that the construction of arguments and the comparison of incompatible arguments are independent phenomena, it is argued that connict resolution plays a role not only in reasoning with, but also in reasoning about defaults. Since in the latter pha...
متن کامل