Prevarication in dispute protocols

Proceedings of the International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Law

Volumn , Issue , 2003, Pages 12-21

  Dunne, Paul E ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF LIVERPOOL   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

argumentation and persuasion; dialogue protocols; locution selection

Indexed keywords

AGENT SOCIETY; ARGUMENTATION AND PERSUASION; ARGUMENTATION FRAMEWORKS; BURDEN OF PROOF; CONTRACT NEGOTIATION; DIALOGUE PROTOCOLS; DISPUTE RESOLUTION; INDIVIDUAL AGENT; LEGAL CONTEXTS; LOCUTION SELECTION; MULTI-AGENT; NON-CLASSICAL LOGIC; NON-COOPERATIVE; NONMONOTONIC LOGIC; PROOF THEORY; PROPOSITIONAL THEORIES;

ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE; SECURITY OF DATA;

CONTRACTS;

EID: 3142669599     PISSN: None     EISSN: None     Source Type: Conference Proceeding    
DOI: 10.1145/1047788.1047791     Document Type: Conference Paper

References (25)

1. A. Artikis, J. Pitt, and M. Sergot. Animated Specifications of Computational Societies In Proceedings of the first international joint conference on Autonomous agents and multiagent systems, pages 1053-1061. ACM Press, 2002.
2. T. J. M. Bench-Capon. Specification and implementation of Toulmin dialogue game. In J. C. Hage et al., editor, Legal Knowledge Based Systems, pages 5-20. GNI, 1998.
3. T. J. M. Bench-Capon, P. E. Dunne, and P. H. Leng. A dialogue game for dialectical interaction with expert systems. In Proc. 12th Annual Conference on Expert Systems and their applications, pages 105-113, 1992.
4. C. Cayrol, S. Doutre, and J. Mengin. On decision problems related to the preferred semantics for argumentation frameworks. Technical report, I.R.I.T., Toulouse, (to appear, Jnl. of Logic and Computation), 2002.
5. Y. Dimopoulos and A. Torres. Graph theoretical structures in logic programs and default theories. Theoretical Computer Science, 170:209-244, 1996.
6. P. M. Dung. On the acceptability of arguments and its fundamental role in nonmonotonic reason, logic programming, and N-person games. Artificial Intelligence, 77:321-357, 1995.
7. P. E. Dunne and T.J.M. Bench-Capon. Two party immediate response disputes: Properties and efficiency. Technical Report ULCS-01-005, Dept. of Comp. Sci., Univ. of Liverpool, (to appear Artificial Intelligence, 2003)
8. P. E. Dunne and P. McBurney. Optimal Utterances in Dialogoue Protocols Technical report, ULCS-02-028, Dept. of Comp. Sci., Univ. of Liverpool, 2002. (to appear: Proc. Second International Joint. Conf. on Autonomous Agents and Multi-Aagent Systems, (AAMAS 2003), Melbourne, July 2003)
9. J. G. Fuller. The Day of St. Anthony's Fire. Hutchinson Publishing Group, London, 1969
10. D. Gabbay and J. Woods. More on Non-Cooperation in Dialogue Logic Logic Jnl. of the IGPL, 9:305-323, 2001
11. T. F. Gordon. The Pleadings Game: An Artificial Intelligence Model of Procedural Justice. Kluwer Academic Publishers, Dordrecht, 1995.
12. H. Jakobovits. On the theory of argumentation frameworks. PhD thesis, Vrije Universiteit Brussels, April 2000.
13. H. Jakobovits and D. Vermeir. Dialectic semantics for argumentation frameworks. In Proceedings of the Seventh International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Law (ICAIL-99), ACM SIGART, pages 53-62, N. Y., June 1999. ACM Press.
14. The Lawyer's Code of Professional Responsibility. New York State 2002
15. A. R. Lodder. Dialaw: On legal justification and Dialogue Games. PhD thesis, Univ. of Maastricht, 1998.
16. S. A. Matthews. Veto threats: rhetoric in a bargaining game The Quarterly Jnl. of Economics, May 1989, 347-369.
17. P. McBurney and S. Parsons. Games that agents play: A formal framework for dialogues between autonomous agents. Journal of Logic, Language and Information, 11:315-334, 2002.
18. P. McBurney, S. Parsons, and M. Wooldridge. Desiderata for agent argumentation protocols. In Proceedings of the first international joint conference on Autonomous agents and multiagent systems, pages 402-409. ACM Press, 2002.
19. When are two protocols the same? In M. P. Huget, F. Dignum and J. L. Koning, editors, Agent Communications Languages and Conversation Policies, Proc. AAMAS-02 Workshop, Bologna, Italy, 2002.
20. S. Parsons, C. A. Sierra, and N. R. Jennings. Agents that reason and negotiate by arguing, Journal of Logic and Computation, 8(3):261-292, 1998.
21. H. Prakken. Logical Tools for Modelling Legal Argument. Kluwer Academic Publishers, 1997.
22. C. Reed. Dialogue frames in agent communications. In Y. Demazeau, editor, Proc. 3rd International Conference on Multi-agent systems (ICMAS-98), pages 246-253. IEEE Press, 1998.
23. A. Urquhart. The complexity of Gentzen systems for propositional logic. Theoretical Computer Science 66(1):87-97, 1989.
24. G. Vreeswijk and H. Prakken. Credulous and sceptical argument games for preferred semantics. In Proceedings of JELIA '2000, The 7th European Workshop on Logic for Artificial Intelligence., pages 224-238, Berlin, 2000. Springer LNAI 1919, Springer Verlag.
25. D. N. Walton and E. C. W. Krabbe. Committment in Dialogue: Basic Concepts of Interpersonal Reasoning. Univ. of New York Press, 1995.