Deliberation dialogues for reasoning about safety critical actions

Autonomous Agents and Multi-Agent Systems

Volumn 25, Issue 2, 2012, Pages 209-259

  Tolchinsky, Pancho ^a   Modgil, Sanjay ^b   Atkinson, Katie ^c   McBurney, Peter ^c   Cortés, Ulises ^a  

^a UNIVERSITAT POLITÈCNICA DE CATALUNYA   (Spain)

^b KING'S COLLEGE LONDON   (United Kingdom)

^c UNIVERSITY OF LIVERPOOL   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

Argument schemes; Argumentation; Deliberation; Multi agent systems

Indexed keywords

ARGUMENT SCHEMES; ARGUMENTATION; CRITICAL QUESTIONS; DELIBERATION; DELIBERATION DIALOGUES; HETEROGENEOUS AGENTS; MAIN TASKS; MEDIATOR AGENTS; MULTI AGENT SYSTEM (MAS); REASONING PATTERNS; SAFETY-CRITICAL;

MULTI AGENT SYSTEMS;

EID: 84859428929     PISSN: 13872532     EISSN: 15737454     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1007/s10458-011-9174-5     Document Type: Article

References (64)

1. Aamodt A., Plaza E. (1994) Case-based reasoning: Foundational issues, methodological variations, and system approaches. Artificial Intelligence Communications 7(1): 39-59.
2. Amgoud, L., & Cayrol, C. (1998). On the acceptability of arguments in preference-based argumentation. In Proceedings of the fourteenth conference on Uncertainty in Artificial Intelligence (UAI 1998) (pp. 1-7). Madison, WI.
3. Atkinson K., Bench-Capon T., McBurney P. (2005) Computational representation of practical argument. Synthese 152(2): 157-206.
4. Atkinson, K., Bench-Capon, T., & McBurney, P. (2005). A dialogue game protocol for multi-agent argument over proposals for action. In Autonomous Agents and Multi-Agent Systems, 11, 153-171.
5. Atkinson, K., Bench-Capon, T., & Modgil, S. (2006). Argumentation for decision support. In Database and expert systems applications (pp. 822-831). Berlin: Springer.
6. Bench-Capon T. J. M. (2003) Persuasion in practical argument using value based argumentation frameworks. Journal of Logic and Computation 13(3): 429-448.
7. Bench-Capon T. J. M., Dunne P. E. (2007) Argumentation in artificial intelligence. Artificial Intelligence 171(10-15): 619-641.
8. Bench-Capon, T., & Prakken, H. (2010). Using argument schemes for hypothetical reasoning in law. Artificial Intelligence and Law, 18, 1-22.
9. Bentahar J., Moulin B., Bélanger M. (2010) A taxonomy of argumentation models used for knowledge representation. Artificial Intelligence Review 33(3): 211-259.
10. Bentahar, J., Moulin, B., & Chaib-draa, B. (2005). Specifying and implementing a persuasion dialogue game using commitments and arguments. In Argumentation in Multi-Agent Systems (pp. 130-148). Berlin: Springer.
11. Black, E., & Atkinson, K. (2009). Dialogues that account for different perspectives in collaborative argumentation. In Proceedings of the 8th international conference on Autonomous agents and multiagent systems (Vol. 2, pp. 867-874). International Foundation for Autonomous Agents and Multiagent Systems.
12. Black, E., & Atkinson, K. (2010). Agreeing what to do. In ArgMAS 2010 (p. 1. Estoril, Portugal.
13. Cartwright D., Atkinson K. (2009) Using computational argumentation to support e-participation. IEEE Intelligent Systems 24(5): 42-52.
14. Chalamish, M., & Kraus, S. (2007). AutoMed: An automated mediator for bilateral negotiations under time constraints. In Proceedings of the 6th international joint conference on Autonomous agents and multiagent systems (p. 248). New York: ACM.
15. Chesnevar, C. I., Simari, G. R., & Godo, L. (2005). Computing dialectical trees efficiently in possibilistic defeasible logic programming. In Logic programming and nonmonotonic reasoning (pp. 158-171). Berlin: Springer.
16. Cortés, U., & Poch, M. (Eds.). (2009). Advanced agent-based environmental management systems. Whitestein Series in Software Agent Technologies and Autonomic Computing. Basel: Birkhäuser/Springer.
17. Dung P. M. (1995) On the acceptability of arguments and its fundamental role in nonmonotonic reasoning, logic programming and n-person games. Artificial Intelligence 77: 321-357.
18. Dung P. M., Mancarella P., Toni F. (2007) Computing ideal sceptical argumentation. Artificial Intelligence 171(10-15): 642-674.
19. Gaines, B. R., Norrie, D. H., & Lapsley, A. Z. (2002). Mediator: An intelligent information system supporting the virtual manufacturing enterprise. In Systems, man and cybernetics, 1995. IEEE international conference on Intelligent systems for the 21st century (Vol. 1, pp. 964-969). New York: IEEE.
20. Gärdenfors P. (1988) Knowledge in flux: Modeling the dynamics of epistemic states. MIT Press/A Bradford Book, Cambridge.
21. Georgeff M. P., & Lansky, A. L. (1987). Reactive reasoning and planning. In AAAI (pp. 677-682). Seattle, WA.
22. Gordon T. F., Prakken H., Walton D. (2007) The carneades model of argument and burden of proof. Artificial Intelligence 171(10-15): 875-896.
23. Gordon, T. F., & Walton, D. (2009). Legal reasoning with argumentation schemes. In 12th international conference on Artificial Intelligence and Law (pp. 137-146). New York: ACM.
24. Isern, D., Sánchez, D., & Moreno, A. (2010). Agents applied in health care: A review. International Journal of Medical Informatics, 79(3), 145-166.
25. Kauffman H. M., McBride M. A., Delmonico F. L. (2000) First report of the United Network for Organ Sharing Transplant Tumor Registry: Donors with a history of cancer. Transplantation 70(12): 1747.
26. Kok, E. M., Meyer, J. J. C., Prakken, H., & Vreeswijk, G. A. W. (2010). A formal argumentation framework for deliberation dialogues. In ArgMAS 2010 (p. 73). Berlin: Springer.
27. Lopez-Navidad A., Caballero F. (2003) Extended criteria for organ acceptance. Strategies for achieving organ safety and for increasing organ pool. Clinical Transplantation 17(4): 308-324.
28. Marelli D., Laks H., Bresson S., Ardehali A., Bresson J., Esmailian F., Plunkett M., Moriguchi J., Kobashigawa J. (2003) Results after transplantation using donor hearts with preexisting coronary artery disease. The Journal of Thoracic and Cardiovascular Surgery 126(3): 821-825.
29. Mbarki, M., Bentahar, J., & Moulin, B. (2007). Specification and complexity of strategic-based reasoning using argumentation. Argumentation in Multi-Agent Systems (pp. 142-160). Berlin: Springer.
30. McBurney P., Hitchcock D., Parsons S. (2007) The eightfold way of deliberation dialogue. International Journal of Intelligent Systems 22(1): 95-132.
31. McBurney P., Parsons S. (2002) Games that agents play: A formal framework for dialogues between autonomous agents. Journal of Logic, Language and Information 13: 315-343.
32. McBurney P., van Eijk R. M., Parsons S., Amgoud L. (2003) A dialogue game protocol for agent purchase negotiations. Autonomous Agents and Multi-Agent Systems 7(3): 235-273.
33. Modgil S. (2009) Reasoning about preferences in argumentation frameworks. Artificial Intelligence 173(9-10): 901-934.
34. Modgil, S., & Fox, J. (2009). A guardian agent approach to safety in medical multi-agent systems. In Safety and security in multiagent systems (pp. 67-79). Berlin: Springer.
35. Oikarinen, E., & Woltran, S. (2010). Characterizing strong equivalence for argumentation frameworks. In Proceedings of the 12th international conference on Principles of knowledge representation and reasoning (KR 2010). Menlo Park, CA: AAAI Press.
36. Oliva E., McBurney P., Omicini A., Viroli M. (2010) Argumentation and artifacts for negotiation support. International Journal of Artificial Intelligence 4(S10): 90.
37. Parsons, S., McBurney, P., Sklar, E., & Wooldridge, M. (2007). On the relevance of utterances in formal inter-agent dialogues. In Proceedings of the 4th international conference on Argumentation in multi-agent systems (pp. 47-62). Berlin: Springer.
38. Prakken H. (2005) Coherence and flexibility in dialogue games for argumentation. Journal of logic and computation 15(6): 1009.
39. Prakken H. (2006) Formal systems for persuasion dialogue. The Knowledge Engineering Review 21(2): 163-188.
40. Rahwan, I., Banihashemi, B., Reed, C., Walton, D., & Abdallah, S. (to appear). Representing and classifying arguments on the semantic web. The Knowledge Engineering Review.
41. Rahwan, I., Ramchurn, S. D., Jennings, N. R., McBurney, P., Parsons, S., & Sonenberg, L. (2004). Argumentation-based negotiation. The Knowledge Engineering Review. In press.
42. Rahwan, I., & Simari G. R. (2009) Argumentation in Artificial Intelligence. Berlin: Springer, Incorporated.
43. Reed, C., Norman, T. J. (eds) (2004) Argumentation machines: New frontiers in argument and computation. Kluwer, Dordrecht.
44. Reed C., Rowe G. (2004) Araucaria: Software for argument analysis, diagramming and representation. International Journal on Artificial Intelligence Tools 13(4): 983.
45. Reed C., Wells S. (2007) Dialogical argument as an interface to complex debates. IEEE Intelligent Systems 22: 60-65.
46. Reed, C., Wells, S., Devereux, J., & Rowe, G. (2008). Aif+: Dialogue in the argument interchange format. In Proceeding of the 2008 conference on Computational models of argument (COMMA 2008) (pp. 311-323). Amsterdam: IOS Press.
47. Searle J. R. (2003) Rationality in action. MIT, Cambridge.
48. Shen W., Maturana F., Norrie D. H. (2000) MetaMorph II: An agent-based architecture for distributed intelligent design and manufacturing. Journal of Intelligent Manufacturing 11(3): 237-251.
49. Sierra, C., Jennings, N. R., Noriega, P., & Parsons, S. (1998). A framework for argumentation-based negotiation. In M. P. Singh, A. Rao, & M. J. Wooldridge (Eds.), Intelligent agents IV: Agent theories, architectures, and languages. 4th International ATAL Workshop. Lecture Notes in Artificial Intelligence, 1365 (pp. 177-192). Berlin: Springer.
50. Simoff, S., Sierra, C., & De Mántaras, R. L. (2008). Requirements towards automated mediation agents. In Pre-proceedings of the KR2008-workshop on Knowledge representation for agents and multi-agent systems, Sydney, September 2008 (p. 171). Citeseer.
51. Tolchinsky, P., Atkinson, K., McBurney, P., Modgil, S., & Cortés, U. (2007). Agents deliberating over action proposals using the proclaim model. In CEEMAS (pp. 32-41). Leipzig, Germany.
52. Tolchinsky, P., Aulines, M., Cortes, U., & Poch, M. (2009). Deliberation over the safety of industrial wastewater discharges into wastewater treatment plants. In Advanced agent-based environmental management systems. Whitestein Series in Software Agent Technologies and Autonomic Computing (Chap. 2, pp. 37-60). Basel: Birkhäuser/Springer.
53. Tolchinsky, P., Cortes, U., & Grecu, D. (2008). Argumentation-based agents to increase human organ availability for transplant. In Agent Technology and e-Health. Whitestein Series in Software Agent Technologies and Autonomic Computing (Chap. 3, pp. 65-93). Basel: Birkhäuser/Springer.
54. Tolchinsky P., Cortés U., Modgil S., Caballero F., López-Navidad A. (2006) Increasing human-organ transplant availability: Argumentation-based agent deliberation. IEEE Intelligent Systems 21(6): 30-37.
55. Tolchinsky, P., Cortés, U., Nieves, J. C., Caballero, F., & López-Navidad, A. (2005). Using arguing agents to increase the human organ pool for transplantation. In 3rd workshop on Agents applied in health care (IJCAI-05). Edinburgh, UK.
56. Tolchinsky, P., Modgil, S., Atkinson, K., McBurney, P., & Cortés, U. (2011). Deliberation dialogues for reasoning about safety critical actions. Technical report, Technical University of Catalonia, 2011. http://www. lsi. upc. edu/~tolchinsky/publications/techReport2011. pdf.
57. Tolchinsky P., Modgil, S., & Cortés, U. (2006). Argument schemes and critical questions for heterogeneous agents to argue over the viability of a human organ. In AAAI 2006 SS Series; Argumentation for consumers of healthcare (pp. 105-111). Stanford AAAI Press.
58. Tolchinsky, P., Modgil, S., Cortés, U., & Sànchez-Marrè, M. (2006). CBR and argument Schemes for collaborative decision making. In COMMA, Vol. 144 of Frontiers in Artificial Intelligence and Applications (pp. 71-82). Amsterdam: IOS Press.
59. Vázquez-Salceda J., Cortés U., Padget J., López-Navidad A., Caballero F. (2003) The organ allocation process: A natural extension of the CARREL Agent-Mediated Electronic Institution. AiCommunications 3(16): 153-165.
60. Verheij B. (2003) Dialectical argumentation with argumentation schemes: An approach to legal logic. Artificial Intelligence Law 11(2-3): 167-195.
61. Walton D. N. (1996) Argument schemes for presumptive reasoning. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Mahwah, NJ.
62. Walton, D. N., & Krabbe, E. C. W. (1995). Commitment in dialogue: Basic concepts of inter-personal reasoning. SUNY Series in Logic and language. Albany, NY: State University of New York Press.
63. Wyner, A., & Bench-Capon, T. (2007). Argument schemes for legal case-based reasoning. In Proceeding of the 2007 Conference on Legal Knowledge and Information Systems: JURIX 2007: The Twentieth Annual Conference (pp. 139-149). Ios Press.
64. Zink S., Smolen H., Catalano J., Marwin V., Wertlieb S. (2005) NATCO, the organization for transplant professionals public policy statement. HIV-to-HIV transplantation. Progress in transplantation (Aliso Viejo, CA) 15(1): 86.