A Possibilistic Argumentation Decision Making Framework with Default Reasoning

نویسندگان

  • Juan Carlos Nieves
  • Roberto Confalonieri
چکیده

In this paper, we introduce a possibilistic argumentation-based decision making framework which is able to capture uncertain information and exceptions/defaults. In particular, we define the concept of a possibilistic decision making framework which is based on a possibilistic default theory, a set of decisions and a set of prioritized goals. This set of goals captures user preferences related to the achievement of a particular state in a decision making problem. By considering the inference of the possibilistic well-founded semantics, the concept of argument with respect to a decision is defined. This argument captures the feasibility of reaching a goal by applying a decision in a given context. The inference in the argumentation decision making framework is based on basic argumentation semantics. Since some basic argumentation semantics can infer more than one possible scenario of a possibilistic decision making problem, we define some criteria for selecting potential solutions of the problem.

برای دانلود 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

Application of Possibilistic Stable Models to Decision Making

This paper investigates the applicability of Possibilistic Stable Models (PSM) for Logic Programming to decision making through the use of several extensions to the PSM formalism that are chosen to enhance the realism in the resulting decision making model. The selected extensions to PSMs are unified through their incorporation into an argumentation framework designed to represent the combined ...

متن کامل

On the theory of argumentation frameworks

argumentation has been developed in a theoretical way, in noteworthy works such as [Tou58], [Fel84], [Dun95], [KT96], [BDKT97], [KMD94], [Pol94], [Vre97], [PS96a], [PS97], and [Ver96]. Argumentation-theoretic interpretations and proof-procedures are applicable in practical reasoning, legal reasoning ([KT96], [PS95]), mediation systems ([GK96], [BG94]), decision-making systems ([KPG96]), and are...

متن کامل

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 کامل

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 کامل

A Logic Programming Framework for Possibilistic Argumentation with Vague Knowledge

Defeasible argumentation frameworks have evolved to become a sound setting to formalize commonsense, qualitative reasoning from incomplete and potentially inconsistent knowledge. Defeasible Logic Programming (DeLP) is a defeasible argumentation formalism based on an extension of logic programming. Although DeLP has been successfully integrated in a number of different real-world applications, D...

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

برای دانلود 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

عنوان ژورنال:
  • Fundam. Inform.

دوره 113  شماره 

صفحات  -

تاریخ انتشار 2011