Argumentation vs Meta-argumentation for the Assessment of Multi-agent Conflict

Boris Galitsky, Sergey O Kuznetsov, Boris Kovalerchuk

Comparative analysis of argumentation and meta-argumentation is conducted to track the plausibility of scenarios of interaction between agents. Meta-argumentation deals with the overall structure of a scenario, which included communicative actions in addition to attack relations and is learned from previous experience of multi-agent interactions. Object-level argumentation is a traditional machinery to handle argumentative structure of a dialogue, assessing the plausibility of individual claims. Evaluation of contribution of each argumentation level shows that both levels of argumentation are essential for assessment of multi-agent scenarios.

Subjects: 5. Common Sense Reasoning; 12. Machine Learning and Discovery

Submitted: May 6, 2008


This page is copyrighted by AAAI. All rights reserved. Your use of this site constitutes acceptance of all of AAAI's terms and conditions and privacy policy.