Titlebook: Argumentation in Multi-Agent Systems; 8th International Wo Peter McBurney,Simon Parsons,Iyad Rahwan Conference proceedings 2012 Springer-Ve

Melodrama

Reasoning about and Discussing Preferences between Argumentstopics. Several mechanisms for using other agents’ knowledge have been proposed in the literature. This paper proposes to use different acceptance attitudes with respect to claims made in a dialogue and to store the source of those claims on a meta-level. In the meta-level, agents can then reason ab

良心

Nicolas Vandapel,Martial Hebertn the modules. The paper lays the foundations of this approach, presents an abstract agent architecture and gives the general underlying argumentation machinery minimally required for building such agents, including the important aspects of inter-module coordination via argumentation. It presents th

lacrimal-gland

M. Zinn,O. Khatib,B. Roth,J. K. SalisburyWe give a generality order of four practical argumentation frameworks specified by taking into account Dungean semantics and Pareto optimality. We show that a member of preferred extensions of the most specific one is not just Pareto optimal, but also it is theoretically justified.

Commonwealth

Solace

implore

ABA: Argumentation Based Agents decision making, communication, negotiation) when confronted with specific multiagent problems. In this paper we take this idea one step further and develop the concept of a fully integrated argumentation-based agent architecture. Under this architecture, an agent is composed of a collection of mod

Solace

Practical Argumentation Semantics for Pareto Optimality and Its Relationships with Valuessuch argumentation should satisfy Pareto optimality because the consequences strongly depend on desires, aims, or values an individual agent or a group of agents has. We define a practical argumentation framework and two kinds of extensions, preferred and grounded extensions, with respect to each gr

細(xì)胞膜

進(jìn)入

A Semantics for Dynamic Argumentation Frameworkstion affecting subsequent arguments. Although such dynamic treatment is necessary to grasp the behavior of actual argumentation, semantics proposed to date can only handle the static aspects. Here, we present a new semantics that fits dynamic argumentation. We discuss what properties hold and explai

可商量