Specifying and implementing a persuasion dialogue game using commitments and arguments

Lecture Notes in Artificial Intelligence (Subseries of Lecture Notes in Computer Science)

Volumn 3366, Issue , 2005, Pages 130-148

  Bentahar, Jamal ^a   Moulin, Bernard ^a,b   Chaib draa, Brahim ^a  

^a UNIVERSITÉ LAVAL   (Canada)

^b Geomatica Research Centre   (Canada)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ALGORITHMS; COMMUNICATION SYSTEMS; COMPUTATIONAL COMPLEXITY; GAME THEORY; MATHEMATICAL MODELS; NETWORK PROTOCOLS; SOCIAL ASPECTS;

ARGUMENTATION; COMMITMENT AND ARGUMENT NETWORK (CAN); PERSUASION PROTOCOL; TRUSTWORTHINESS;

MULTI AGENT SYSTEMS;

EID: 26844478776     PISSN: 03029743     EISSN: None     Source Type: Conference Proceeding    
DOI: 10.1007/978-3-540-32261-0_9     Document Type: Conference Paper

References (31)

1. rd Hawaii Int. Conf. On Systems Science (2000).
2. Amgoud, L., Maudet, N., and Parsons, N. Modelling dialogues using argumentation. In Proc. of the 4th Int. Conf. on MAS (2000) 31-38.
3. Bench-Capon, T.J.M., Freeman J.B., Hohmann, H., and Prakken, H. Computational models, argumentation theories and legal practice. In Reed, C. and Norman, T.J. (eds.). Argumentation Machines. New Frontiers in Argument and Computation. Kluwer Argumentation Library (2003) 85-120.
4. Bentahar, J., Moulin, B., and Chaib-draa, B. Vers une approche à base d'engagements et d'arguments pour la modélisation du dialogue. In Modèles Formels de l'Interaction, Cépaduès (2003) 19-28.
5. Bentahar, J., Moulin, B., and Chaib-draa, B. Commitment and argument network: a new formalism for agent communication. Dignum, F. (ed.). Advances in Agent Communication. Lecture Notes in Artificial Intelligence, vol. 2922. Springer-Verlag, (2003) 146-165.
6. Bentahar, J., Moulin, B., Meyer, J-J, Ch., and Chaib-draa, B. A logical model for commitment and argument network (extended abstract). In Proc. Of the 3rd Int. J. Conf. On AAMAS (2004) 792-799.
7. Bhat, G., Cleaveland, R., and Groce, A. Efficient model checking via Büchi tableau automata. In Berry, G., Comon, H., and Finkel, A. (eds). Computer-Aided Verification, Lecture Notes in Computer Scuence, vol. 2102. Springer-Verlag, (2001) 38-52.
8. Castelfranchi, C. Commitments: from individual intentions to groups and organizations. In Proc. of the Int. Conf. on Multi-Agent Systems (1995) 41-48.
9. Dastani, M., Hulstijn, J. and der Torre, L. V. Negotiation protocols and dialogue games. In Proc. of the Belgium/Dutch AI Conf. (2000) 13-20.
10. Dignum, F., Dunin-Keplicz, and Verbugge, R., Creation collective intention through dialogue. Logic Journal of the IGPL, 9(2) (2001) 305-319.
11. Elvang-Goransson, M., Fox, J., and Krause, P. Dialectic reasoning with inconsistent information. In Proc. of the 9th Conf. on Uncertainty in AI. (1993) 114-121.
12. Fornara, N. and Colombetti, M. Defining protocols using a commitment-based agent communication language. In Proc. Of the 2nd Int. J. Conf. On AAMAS (2003) 520-527.
13. Maudet, N. and Chaib-draa, B. Commitment-based and dialogue-game based protocols, new trends in agent communication languages. Knowledge Engineering Review, 17(2), Cambridge Univ. Press (2002) 157-179.
14. McBurney, P. and Parsons, S. Games that agents play: A formal framework for dialogues between autonomous agents. Journal of Logic, Language, and Information, 11(3) (2002) 1-22.
15. McBurney, P. Rational Interaction. Thesis of Univ. of Liverpool (2002).
16. Parsons, S., Wooldridge, M., and Amgoud, L. On the outcomes of formal inter-agent Dialogues. In Proc. Of the 2nd Int. J. Conf. On AAMAS (2003) 616-623.
17. Prakken, H. Logical Tools for Modelling legal argument. A study of defeasible reasoning in law. Kluwer Law and Philosophy Library (1997).
18. Prakken, H. and Sartor, G. Modelling reasoning with precedents in a formal dialogue game. Artificial Intelligence and Law, vol.6 (1998) 231-287.
19. Prakken, H. and Vreeswijk, G. Logics for defeasible argumentation. Gabbay, D., (ed.), Handbook of Philosophical Logic, Kluwer (2000) 218-319.
20. Ramchum, S.D., Sierra, C., Jennings, N.R., and Godo L. A computational trust model for multi-agent interactions based on confidence and reputation. In Proc. of 6th Int. Workshop of Deception, Fraud and Trust in Agent Societies (2003) 69-75.
21. Reed, C. Dialogue frames in agent communication. In Proc. of the 3rd Int. Conf. on MAS. (1998) 246-253.
22. Sabater, J. and Sierra, C. Reputation and social network analysis in multi-agent systems. In Proc. Of the 1st Int. J. Conf. On AAMAS (2002) 475-482.
23. Sadri, F., Toni, F., Torroni, P. Logic agents, dialogues and negotiation: an abductive approach. In Proc. of Symposium on Information Agents for E-Commerce (2001).
24. Searle, J.R. Speech acts: an essay in the philosophy of language. Cambridge University Press, England (1969).
25. Singh, M.P. Agent communication languages: rethinking the principles, IEEE Computer (1998) 40-47.
26. Smith, I.A., Cohen, P.R., Bradshaw, J.M., Greaves, M., and Holmback, H. Designing conversation policies using joint intention theory. In Proc. of the 3rd Int. Conf on MAS (1998) 269-276.
27. Vanderveken, D., Illocutionary logic and discourse typology. Searle with his Replies of Revue Internat, de Philosophie. 2001.
28. Vreeswijk, G.A.W. Abstract argumentation systems. Artificial Intelligence, 90 (1-2), 1997, 225-279.
29. Walton, D.N. and Krabbe, E.C.W. Commitment in dialogue: basic concepts of interpersonal reasoning. State Univ. of New York Press, Albany, NY (1995).
30. Yolum, P. and Singh, M.P. Flexible protocol specification and execution: applying event calculus planning using commitments. In Proc. of Int. J. Conf. On AAMAS (2002) 527-534.
31. Yu, B. and Singh, M. An evidential model of distributed reputation management. In Proc. Of the 1st Int. J. Conf. On AAMAS (2002) 294-301.