Skip to main content

CBR Contributions to Argumentation in MAS

  • Chapter
Innovations in Hybrid Intelligent Systems

Part of the book series: Advances in Soft Computing ((AINSC,volume 44))

  • 1342 Accesses

Abstract

On discussing the necessary features for a group of agents to argue about their positions and intentions over a specific issue some questions arise: Why do agents interact? Is saving the knowledge generated in the interaction useful? How do agents manage arguments? How do agents dialogue? CBR is an adequate way to tackle such argumentation issues in MAS. This paper clarifies the advances achieved by applying CBR to argumentation in MAS, identifies open issues and proposes new ideas to face future challenges.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 169.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 219.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. A. Aamodt and E. Plaza, Case-based reasoning; Foundational issues, methodological variations, and system approaches. AI Communications, vol. (7)1: 39–59, 1994.

    Google Scholar 

  2. A. Aamodt, Knowledge-intensive case-based reasoning in Creek. In Proceedings of the 7th European Conference (ECCBR-04), pp. 1–15, 2004.

    Google Scholar 

  3. V. Aleven and K.D. Ashley, Teaching Case-Based Argumentation Through a Model and Examples, Empirical Evaluation of an Intelligent Learning Environment. In Proc. of the 8th World Conf. of the Artificial Intelligence in Education Society, pp. 87–94, 1997.

    Google Scholar 

  4. E. Armengol and E. Plaza, Lazy induction of descriptions for relational case-based learning. In Proc. of the Euro. Conf. on Machine Learning (ECML-01), pp. 13–24, 2001.

    Google Scholar 

  5. K.D. Ashley, Reasoning with Cases and Hypotheticals in Hypo. International Journal of Man-Machine Studies, vol. (34): 753–796, 1991.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. T.J.M. Bench-Capon, P.E. Dunne, Argumentation in Artificial Intelligence, Artificial Intelligence, doi: 10.1016/j.artint.2007.05.001, 2007.

    Google Scholar 

  7. N. Karacapilidis, et al., Using Case-Based Reasoning for Argumentation with Multiple Viewpoints, In Proc. of the 2nd Int. Conf. on CBR (ICCBR-97), pp. 541–552, July 1997.

    Google Scholar 

  8. N. Karacapilidis and D. Papadias, Computer supported argumentation and collaborative decision-making: the HERMES system, Information Systems, vol. 26(4): 259–77, 2001.

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  9. S. Modgil, et al., Towards formalising agent argumentation over the viability of human organs for transplantation. Proc. Mexican Int. Conf. on AI (MICAI 05), pp 928–938, 2005.

    Google Scholar 

  10. S. Ontañón and E. Plaza, Learning and Joint Deliberation through Argumentation in Multi-Agent Systems, In Proceedings of AAMAS-07, 2007.

    Google Scholar 

  11. I. Rahwan, et al., Argumentation-based negotiation. Knowledge Engineering Review, 18(4):343–375, 2003.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. I. Rahwan, Guest Editorial: Argumentation in Multi-Agent Systems. Autonomous Agents and Multi-Agent Systems, 11(2): 115–125, 2005.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. E.L. Rissland and D.B. Skalak, CABARET: Rule Interpretation in a Hybrid Architecture. International Journal of Man-Machine Studies, vol. (34): 839–887, 1991.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. E.L. Rissland et al., Bankxx: a program to generate argument through case-based search. In Proc. of the Int. Conf. on AI and Law (ICAIL-93), pp 117–124, 1993.

    Google Scholar 

  15. L-K. Soh and C. Tsatsoulis, Agent-Based Argumentative Negotiations with CBR, AAAI Fall Symposium on Negotiation Methods for Autonomous Cooperative Sys., 16–25, 2001.

    Google Scholar 

  16. F. Sørmo, et al., Explanation in Case-Based Reasoning; Perspectives and Goals. Artificial Intelligence Review, vol. (24) 2: 109–143, 2005.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. K. Sycara. Persuasive argumentation in negotiation. Theory and Decision, vol. 28, 1990.

    Google Scholar 

  18. P. Tolchinsky et al., CBR and Argument Schemes for Collaborative Decision Making. In Proceedings of COMMA-06, vol. (144): 71–82. IOS Press, 2006.

    Google Scholar 

  19. J. Vázquez-Salceda et al. The Organ Allocation Process: A Natural Extension of the Carrel Agent-Mediated Electronic Institution, AI Communications, vol. 16(3): 153–165, 2003.

    MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  20. D.N. Walton, E.C.W. Krabbe. Commitment in Dialogue: Basic Concepts of Interpersonal Reasoning. SUNY Press, Albany, NY, USA, 1995.

    Google Scholar 

  21. D.N. Walton, Argumentation Schemes for Presumptive Reasoning. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Mahwah, NJ, USA, 1996.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2007 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Heras, S., Julián, V., Botti, V. (2007). CBR Contributions to Argumentation in MAS. In: Corchado, E., Corchado, J.M., Abraham, A. (eds) Innovations in Hybrid Intelligent Systems. Advances in Soft Computing, vol 44. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-74972-1_40

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-74972-1_40

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-540-74971-4

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-540-74972-1

  • eBook Packages: EngineeringEngineering (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics