A Demonstrator to “Expose” Agent-based Argumentation
نویسندگان
چکیده
The potential educational power of digital games which equip learners with motivation and help them focus has well been studied. However, few applications taking advantage of such findings exist, and even fewer are put into practice. In this thesis we investigate the possibility of building game-like applications in order to demonstrate non-trivial AI concepts to non-expert humans. We do so by first implementing Argudem, a game-like demonstrator of agent-based argumentation in the context of automated planning. Then we invite users from a wide range of educational backgrounds to use Argudem so that we can monitor and evaluate their performance. The results of the experimental data analysis suggest that popular demonstrators can be implemented and serve as valuable tools for educational and demonstration purposes. Argudem can serve as a showcase for such applications and motivate initiatives for implementations of similar objective.
منابع مشابه
An implementation of argument based discussion
With the current demonstrator, we present an implementation of formal argumentation that is not only able to evaluate an argument according to standard argumentation semantics, but is also able to engage in a discussion to defend its answer. This discussion is formal yet natural enough to be applicable in agent-to-agent as well as in agent-to-human settings.
متن کاملAn Implementation of Basic Argumentation Components (Demonstration)
The current implementation provides a demonstration of a number of basic argumentation components that can be applied in the context of multi-agent systems. These components include algorithms for calculating argumentation semantics, as well as for determining the justification status of the arguments and providing explanation in the form of formal discussion games. Furthermore, the current dem...
متن کاملArgumentation Based Decision Making for Trust in Multi-Agent Systems
Agents in Multi-Agent Systems depend on assistance from others to attain their goals. Often, goals of agents conflict with each other, and agents can be unreliable or deceitful. Therefore, rational agents embedded in an open Multi-Agent System need to be equipped with algorithms to reason about trust. Currently, existing algorithms mainly focus on performance of these algorithms in terms of uti...
متن کاملFuzzy Argumentation for Trust
In an open Multi-Agent System, the goals of agents acting on behalf of their owners often conflict with each other. Therefore, a personal agent protecting the interest of a single user cannot always rely on them. Consequently, such a personal agent needs to be able to reason about trusting (information or services provided by) other agents. Existing algorithms that perform such reasoning mainly...
متن کاملExtended Defeasible Reasoning for Common Goals in n-Person Argumentation Games
Argumentation games have been proved to be a robust and flexible tool to resolve conflicts among agents. An agent can propose its explanation and its goal known as a claim, which can be refuted by other agents. The situation is more complicated when there are more than two agents playing the game. We propose a weighting mechanism for competing premises to tackle with conflicts from multiple age...
متن کامل