Filters








1,000 Hits in 6.1 sec

Belief change and argumentation in multi-agent scenarios

Jürgen Dix, Sven Ove Hansson, Gabriele Kern-Isberner, Guillermo R. Simari
2016 Annals of Mathematics and Artificial Intelligence  
Usually, agents acting in uncertain and dynamic scenarios need to have the capability of reasoning defeasibly about the environment, ı.e., the agents should be capable of revising hypotheses or previously  ...  the problem of how beliefs should be changed or adjusted in a rational way, argumentation seeks for justifications that show why beliefs are established and options should be chosen.  ... 
doi:10.1007/s10472-016-9530-x fatcat:e4jrdcvvaff4xk3oqikdzek6sa

An Awareness Epistemic Framework for Belief, Argumentation and Their Dynamics

Alfredo Burrieza, Antonio Yuste-Ginel
2021 Electronic Proceedings in Theoretical Computer Science  
The notion of argumentation and the one of belief stand in a problematic relation to one another.  ...  On the other hand, beliefs are an input for argument evaluation: arguments with believed premisses are to be considered as strictly stronger by the agent to arguments whose premisses are not believed.  ...  is an input for belief formation, meaning that rational agents should believe sentences that are ground in good arguments.  ... 
doi:10.4204/eptcs.335.6 fatcat:zerugoziyzcqvhm2hdc4ph3r4u

An Argument-Based Framework to Model an Agent's Beliefs in a Dynamic Environment [chapter]

Marcela Capobianco, Carlos I. Chesñevar, Guillermo R. Simari
2005 Lecture Notes in Computer Science  
One of the most difficult problems in multiagent systems involves representing knowledge and beliefs of agents in dynamic environments.  ...  This paper introduces an argument-based logic programming language called Observation-based Defeasible Logic Programming (ODeLP).  ...  CIC (Argentina), by the Secretaría General de Ciencia y Tecnología de la Universidad Nacional del Sur and by Agencia Nacional de Promoción Científica y Tecnológica (PICT 2002 No. 13096).  ... 
doi:10.1007/978-3-540-32261-0_7 fatcat:zfeq2sllo5ejjofg3ka3wtgkum

Argumentation and the Dynamics of Warranted Beliefs in Changing Environments

Marcela Capobianco, Carlos I. Chesñevar, Guillermo R. Simari
2005 Autonomous Agents and Multi-Agent Systems  
In this paper we present a new argument-based formalism specifically designed for representing knowledge and beliefs of agents in dynamic environments, called Observation-based Defeasible Logic Programming  ...  One of the most difficult problems in Multi-Agent Systems (MAS) involves representing the knowledge and beliefs of an agent which performs its tasks in a dynamic environment.  ...  The same idea is applied to identify contradiction in potential arguments.  ... 
doi:10.1007/s10458-005-1354-8 fatcat:ohbt3v5wgvaibhwwl2v7mxaxvu

The Three Faces of Defeasibility in the Law

Henry Prakken, Giovanni Sartor
2004 Ratio Juris  
That is, it provides the dynamic context in which inference-based and theory based defeasible reasoning take place, through the interaction of multiple agents.  ...  A set of decisional criteria, each one supported by its rationale, susceptible of being compromised through defeasible inferences according to further criteria and rationales, would be translated into  ... 
doi:10.1111/j.0952-1917.2004.00259.x fatcat:kxhu33656rbcldiz63cqgpd6ri

Editorial introduction to the special issue

Salem Benferhat
2013 Annals of Mathematics and Artificial Intelligence  
The information available to intelligent agents is often uncertain, inconsistent and incomplete.  ...  The proposed framework, called t-DeLP, allows to extend argumentation-based defeasible logic in order to represent temporal processes.  ...  Given an argumentation system, in order to check whether an argument is accepted or not, a tree of arguments rooted in it is built and evaluated. Such argumentation trees may be very large.  ... 
doi:10.1007/s10472-013-9354-x fatcat:tags3zayhbc3zmjwzv2mr4ah54

Explanations, belief revision and defeasible reasoning

Marcelo A. Falappa, Gabriele Kern-Isberner, Guillermo R. Simari
2002 Artificial Intelligence  
Finally, we relate the formulated operators with argumentative systems and default reasoning frameworks.  ...  We present different constructions for nonprioritized belief revision, that is, belief changes in which the input sentences are not always accepted.  ...  Acknowledgements We would like to thank David Makinson, Sven Ove Hansson and Eduardo Fermé for helpful discussions on some of the concepts included in this paper.  ... 
doi:10.1016/s0004-3702(02)00258-8 fatcat:d36wisso3jetbgkpj6s5lze7ja

Defeasibility in Legal Reasoning [chapter]

Giovanni Sartor
1995 Law and Philosophy Library  
I shall then argue that cognitive agents need to engage in defeasible reasoning for coping with a complex and changing environment.  ...  Consequently, defeasibility is needed in practical reasoning, and in particular in legal reasoning.  ...  Though one may correctly speak of defeasible reflexes, defeasibility acquires its fullest meaning for cognitive agents: For such agents defeasibility consists in having certain cognitive states and withdrawing  ... 
doi:10.1007/978-94-015-8531-6_4 fatcat:f7c6fo6li5hr5a6iksmbgnplua

Rational Commitment and Legal Reason

Bruce Chapman
2003 Social Science Research Network  
If you need to cite the page number of the author manuscript from TSpace because you cannot access the published version, then cite the TSpace version in addition to the published version using the permanent  ...  MCCLENNEN, RATIONALITY AND DYNAMIC CHOICE (1990). 8.  ...  The argument, for all intents and purposes, will go through just as well if an agent is only required to have a sound knowledge of his own rationality and, in particular, if it is assumed that an agent  ... 
doi:10.2139/ssrn.417081 fatcat:as32i7jbqza3xmpeyw22d67vhi

Introduction to the special issue on belief revision, argumentation, ontologies, and norms

Eduardo Fermé, Guillermo R. Simari
2019 Annals of Mathematics and Artificial Intelligence  
Teze, Antoni Perelló-Moragues, Lluis Godo and Pablo Noriega, introduces a formal framework based on defeasible argumentation to support the choice of actions of a value-driven agent and arrange these actions  ...  In Probability, Coherent Belief and Coherent Belief Change, by John Cantwell and Hans Rott, the authors analyze the statics and dynamics of belief states where these states are formalized as pairs that  ... 
doi:10.1007/s10472-019-09674-2 fatcat:pmcinbtk4nfy3phr63onty3mwq

A taxonomy of argumentation models used for knowledge representation

Jamal Bentahar, Bernard Moulin, Micheline Bélanger
2010 Artificial Intelligence Review  
Understanding argumentation and its role in human reasoning has been a continuous subject of investigation for scholars from the ancient Greek philosophers to current researchers in philosophy, logic and  ...  In this paper, we propose such a conceptual framework, based on taxonomy of the most important argumentation models, approaches and systems found in the literature.  ...  Thus, the beliefs of a rational agent are characterized by the relations between its "internal arguments" supporting its beliefs and the "external arguments" supporting contrary Dung distinguishes two  ... 
doi:10.1007/s10462-010-9154-1 fatcat:fwoetgguzbczpn5kor6k2bm6dm

On the construction of Dialectical Databases

G.R. Simari, C. I. Chesñevar, M. Capobianco
2007 Inteligencia Artificial  
This has sprung a new set of argument-based applications in diverse areas.  ...  In this work, we present detailed algorithms for the creation of dialectical databases in ODeLP and analyze these algorithms in terms of their computational complexity.  ...  DeLP lacks the appropriate mechanisms to represent knowledge in dynamic environments, where agents must be able to perceive the changes in the world and integrate them into its existing beliefs [20] .  ... 
doi:10.4114/ia.v11i35.903 fatcat:cgfo3jjd2jcqrn3ahy2qtvo7bu

Assumption-Based Argumentation for Selection and Composition of Services [chapter]

Francesca Toni
2008 Lecture Notes in Computer Science  
The agents are equipped with beliefs, in the form of (possibly conicting) defeasible rules, goals and alternative decisions. Beliefs, goals, decisions may be ranked according to specied preferences.  ...  We show how beliefs and preferences can be taken into account to support the decisionmaking process of the agent, in order to achieve its goals.  ...  Acknowledgements The author has been supported by a UK Royal Academy of Engineering/ Leverhulme Trust senior fellowship and by the Sixth Framework IST programme of the EC, under the 035200 ARGUGRID project  ... 
doi:10.1007/978-3-540-88833-8_13 fatcat:qytspyalyjbulg5owxg3vgjviy

A review of current defeasible reasoning implementations

Daniel Bryant, Paul Krause
2008 Knowledge engineering review (Print)  
This article surveys existing practical implementations of both defeasible and argumentationbased reasoning engines and associated literature.  ...  We aim to summarise the current state of the art in the research area, show that there are many similiarities and connections between the various implementations and also highlight the differences regarding  ...  Most of his designs have been embedded into OSCAR [58] , a fully implemented architecture for rational agents written in LISP and based upon a general purpose defeasible reasoner.  ... 
doi:10.1017/s0269888908001318 fatcat:wnrfzrfocnfa3dk5luuvdwsjcy

Revising Beliefs Through Arguments: Bridging the Gap Between Argumentation and Belief Revision in MAS [chapter]

Fabio Paglieri, Cristiano Castelfranchi
2005 Lecture Notes in Computer Science  
This paper compares within the MAS framework two separate threads in the formal study of epistemic change: belief revision and argumentation theories.  ...  In MAS such problem becomes evident and inescapable: belief change is usually triggered by communication and persuasion from other agents, involving deception, trust, reputation, negotiation, conflict  ...  beliefs (cf. 3.1), the different stages in Toulmin's model of argumentation (cf. 3.2), the treatment of defeasible reasoning (cf. 3.3), the role of contradictions in arguments (cf. 3.4), and the effects  ... 
doi:10.1007/978-3-540-32261-0_6 fatcat:atfnjam45rfjpmenivp4eupolm
« Previous Showing results 1 — 15 out of 1,000 results