On the relevance of utterances in formal inter-agent dialogues

Proceedings of the International Conference on Autonomous Agents

Volumn , Issue , 2007, Pages 1006-1013

  Parsons, Simon ^a   McBurney, Peter ^b   Sklar, Elizabeth ^a   Wooldridge, Michael ^b  

^a CITY UNIVERSITY OF NEW YORK   (United States)

^b UNIVERSITY OF LIVERPOOL   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

Argumentation; Dialogue; Relevance

Indexed keywords

ARGUMENTATION; DIALOGUE; RELEVANCE;

AGENTS; FUZZY CLUSTERING;

AUTONOMOUS AGENTS;

EID: 60349124301     PISSN: None     EISSN: None     Source Type: Conference Proceeding    
DOI: 10.1145/1329125.1329416     Document Type: Conference Paper

References (27)

1. L. Amgoud and C. Cayrol. On the acceptability of arguments in preference-based argumentation framework. In Proceedings of the 14th Conference on Uncertainty in Artificial Intelligence, pages 1-7, 1998.
2. L. Amgoud, S. Parsons, and N. Maudet. Arguments, dialogue, and negotiation. In W. Horn, editor, Proceedings of the Fourteenth European Conference on Artificial Intelligence, pages 338-342, Berlin, Germany, 2000. IOS Press.
3. J. Bentahar, M. Mbarki, and B. Moulin. Strategic and tactic reasoning for communicating agents. In N. Maudet, I. Rahwan, and S. Parsons, editors, Proceedings of the Third Workshop on Argumentation in Muliagent Systems, Hakodate, Japan, 2006.
4. P. Besnard and A. Hunter. A logic-based theory of deductive arguments. Artificial Intelligence, 128:203-235, 2001.
5. C. Cayrol, C. Devred, and M.-C. Lagasquie-Schiex. Handling controversial arguments in bipolar argumentation frameworks. In P. E. Dunne and T. J. M. Bench-Capon, editors, Computational Models of Argument: Proceedings of COMMA 2006, pages 261-272. IOS Press, 2006.
6. B. Chaib-Draa and F. Dignum. Trends in agent communication language. Computational Intelligence, 18(2):89-101, 2002.
7. F. Dignum, B. Dunin-Kȩplicz, and R. Verbrugge. Agent theory for team formation by dialogue. In C. Castelfranchi and Y. Lespérance, editors, Seventh Workshop on Agent Theories, Architectures, and Languages, pages 141-156, Boston, USA, 2000.
8. P. M. Dung. On the acceptability of arguments and its fundamental role in nonmonotonic reasoning, logic programming and n-person games. Artificial Intelligence, 77:321-357, 1995.
9. P. M. Dung, R. A. Kowalski, and F. Toni. Dialectic proof procedures for assumption-based, admissable argumentation. Artificial Intelligence, 170(2):114-159, 2006.
10. R. A. Flores and R. C. Kremer. To commit or not to commit. Computational Intelligence, 18(2):120-173, 2002.
11. D. M. Gabbay and J. Woods. More on non-cooperation in Dialogue Logic. Logic Journal of the IGPL, 9(2):321-339, 2001.
12. D. M. Gabbay and J. Woods. Non-cooperation in Dialogue Logic. Synthese, 127(1-2):161-186, 2001.
13. C. L. Hamblin. Mathematical models of dialogue. 'Theoria, 37:130-155, 1971.
14. S. Kraus, K. Sycara, and A. Evenchik. Reaching agreements through argumentation: a logical model and implementation. Artificial Intelligence, 104(1-2) :1-69, 1998.
15. N. Oren, T. J. Norman, and A. Preece. Loose lips sink ships: A heuristic for argumentation. In N. Maudet, I. Rahwan, and S. Parsons, editors, Proceedings of the Third Workshop on Argumentation in Muliagent Systems, Hakodate, Japan, 2006.
16. S. Parsons and N. R. Jennings. Negotiation through argumentation - a preliminary report. In Proceedings of Second International Conference on Multi-Agent Systems, pages 267-274, 1996.
17. S. Parsons, M. Wooldridge, and L. Amgoud. An analysis of formal inter-agent dialogues. In 1st International Conference on Autonomous Agents and Multi-Agent Systems. ACM Press, 2002.
18. S. Parsons, M. Wooldridge, and L. Amgoud. On the outcomes of formal inter-agent dialogues. In 2nd International Conference on Autonomous Agents and Multi-Agent Systems. ACM Press, 2003.
19. H. Prakken. On dialogue systems with speech acts, arguments, and counterarguments. In Proceedings of the Seventh European Workshop on Logic in Artificial Intelligence, Berlin, Germany, 2000. Springer Verlag.
20. H. Prakken. Relating protocols for dynamic dispute with logics for defeasible argumentation. Synthese, 127:187-219, 2001.
21. H. Prakken and G. Sartor. Modelling reasoning with precedents in a formal dialogue game. Artificial Intelligence and Law, 6:231-287, 1998.
22. I. Rahwan, P. McBurney, and E. Sonenberg. Towards a theory of negotiation strategy. In I. Rahwan, P. Moraitis, and C. Reed, editors, Proceedings of the 1st International Workshop on Argumentation in Multiagent Systems, New York, NY, 2004.
23. C. Reed. Dialogue frames in agent communications. In Y. Demazeau, editor, Proceedings of the Third International Conference on Multi-Agent Systems, pages 246-253. IEEE Press, 1998.
24. M. Rovatsos, I. Rahwan, F. Fisher, and G. Weiss. Adaptive strategies for practical argument-based negotiation. In I. Rahwan, P. Moraitis, and C. Reed, editors, Proceedings of the 1st International Workshop on Argumentation in Multiagent Systems, New York, NY, 2004.
25. M. Schroeder, D. A. Plewe, and A. Raab. Ultima ratio: should Hamlet kill Claudius. In Proceedings of the 2nd International Conference on Autonomous Agents, pages 467-468, 1998.
26. K. Sycara. Argumentation: Planning other agents' plans. In Proceedings of the Eleventh Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence, pages 517-523, 1989.
27. D. N. Walton and E. C. W. Krabbe. Commitment in Dialogue: Basic Concepts of Interpersonal Reasoning. State University of New York Press, Albany, NY, USA, 1995.