Analysis of Dialogical Argumentation via Finite State Machines
نویسنده
چکیده
Dialogical argumentation is an important cognitive activity by which agents exchange arguments and counterarguments as part of some process such as discussion, debate, persuasion and negotiation. Whilst numerous formal systems have been proposed, there is a lack of frameworks for implementing and evaluating these proposals. First-order executable logic has been proposed as a general framework for specifying and analysing dialogical argumentation. In this paper, we investigate how we can implement systems for dialogical argumentation using propositional executable logic. Our approach is to present and evaluate an algorithm that generates a finite state machine that reflects a propositional executable logic specification for a dialogical argumentation together with an initial state. We also consider how the finite state machines can be analysed, with the minimax strategy being used as an illustration of the kinds of empirical analysis that can be undertaken.
منابع مشابه
Probabilistic Strategies in Dialogical Argumentation
In dialogical argumentation, a participant is often unsure what moves the other participant(s) might make. If the dialogue is proceeding according to some accepted protocol, then a participant might be able to determine what are the possible moves that the other might make, but the participant might be unsure as to which move will be chosen by the other agent. In this paper, propositional execu...
متن کاملRestricted cascade and wreath products of fuzzy finite switchboard state machines
A finite switchboard state machine is a specialized finite state machine. It is built by binding the concepts of switching state machines and commutative state machines. The main purpose of this paper is to give a specific algorithm for fuzzy finite switchboard state machine and also, investigates the concepts of switching relation, covering, restricted cascade products and wreath products of f...
متن کاملRelations between two qualities of collaborative dialogue: knowledge co-elaboration and affective regulation
I present aspects of an analytical model of collaboration processes, focusing on types of dialogical thinking and their relations with the interactive circulation and regulation of affect. Types of dialogical thinking are extensional, accumulative, foundational thinking, together with interactive meaning-making. Their occurrences in argumentation dialogue are discussed in relation to affect.
متن کاملExecutable Logic for Dialogical Argumentation
Argumentation between agents through dialogue is an important cognitive activity. There have been a number of proposals for formalizing dialogical argumentation. However, each proposal involves a number of quite complex definitions, and there is significant diversity in the way different proposals define similar features. This complexity and diversity has hindered analysis and comparison of the...
متن کاملAbduction and Dialogical Proof in Argumentation and Logic Programming
We develop a model of abduction in abstract argumentation, where changes to an argumentation framework act as hypotheses to explain the support of an observation. We present dialogical proof theories for the main decision problems (i.e., finding hypotheses that explain skeptical/credulous support) and we show that our model can be instantiated on the basis of abductive logic programs.
متن کامل