A Framework for Multiagent Deliberation Based on Dialectical Argumentation
نویسندگان
چکیده
Simply put, a multiagent system can be seen as a collection of autonomous agents that as a whole are able to accomplish goals beyond the reach of any of its members. Agent interaction is widely acknowledged as the feature that provides this added potential. Since many, if not all, of the attractive agent interactions can be recasted as deliberations, a formalization for this process is being actively seek. Deliberations among agents resembles a dialectical process like the one present in many formalizations of defeasible argumentation. This paper exploits that resemblance by defining a framework for multiagent deliberation based on a particular dialectical process borrowed from a well-established system of defeasible argumentation.
منابع مشابه
Special issue on argumentation in multi-agent systems
Different agents within a multiagent system (MAS) potentially have access to different information and different capabilities (including reasoning capabilities), different beliefs about the world, different preferences, constraints, and desires, and different goals. A key aspect of the scientific and engineering study of multiagent systems, therefore, has been the development of methods and pro...
متن کاملAn argumentation framework for learning, information exchange, and joint-deliberation in multi-agent systems
Case-Based Reasoning (CBR) can give agents the capability of learning from their own experience and solve new problems, however, in a multi-agent system, the ability of agents to collaborate is also crucial. In this paper we present an argumentation framework (AMAL) designed to provide learning agents with collaborative problem solving (joint deliberation) and information sharing capabilities (...
متن کاملModeling Multiagent Deliberation from an Abstract Standpoint
Simply put, a multiagent system can be understood as a collection of autonomous agents able to accomplish as a whole goals beyond the capabilities of any of its members. The traditional example depicts a heavy armchair that can be easily lifted by coordinating the effort of a group of persons despite that none of them would have been able to pick it up alone. Thus, one might argue that precisel...
متن کاملBDI and BOID Argumentation
In this discussion paper we are interested in the role of argumentation in the context of cognitive BDI and BOID agents, i.e., agents whose deliberation is based on beliefs, obligations, intentions and desires. We discuss argumentation issues for single agent deliberation, multiagent dialogues, and interaction between agents and their normative system. For each category we discuss examples and ...
متن کاملArguments and Counterexamples in Case-Based Joint Deliberation
Multiagent learning can be seen as applying ML techniques to the core issues of multiagent systems, like communication, coordination, and competition. In this paper, we address the issue of learning from communication among agents circumscribed to a scenario with two agents that (1) work in the same domain using a shared ontology, (2) are capable of learning from examples, and (3) communicate u...
متن کامل