5 found
Sort by:
  1. Simon Parsons, Katie Atkinson, Zimi Li, Peter McBurney, Elizabeth Sklar, Munindar Singh, Karen Haigh, Karl Levitt & Jeff Rowe (2014). Argument Schemes for Reasoning About Trust. Argument and Computation 5 (2-3):160-190.
    Trust is a natural mechanism by which an autonomous party, an agent, can deal with the inherent uncertainty regarding the behaviours of other parties and the uncertainty in the information it shares with those parties. Trust is thus crucial in any decentralised system. This paper builds on recent efforts to use argumentation to reason about trust. Specifically, a set of schemes is provided, and abstract patterns of reasoning that apply in multiple situations geared towards trust. Schemes are described in which (...)
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  2. Peter McBurney & Simon Parsons (2007). Retraction and Revocation in Agent Deliberation Dialogs. Argumentation 21 (3):269-289.
    We present a generic denotational semantic framework for protocols for dialogs between rational and autonomous agents over action which allows for retraction and revocation of proposals for action. The semantic framework views participants in a deliberation dialog as jointly and incrementally manipulating the contents of shared spaces of action-intention tokens. The framework extends prior work by decoupling the identity of an agent who first articulates a proposal for action from the identity of any agent then empowered to retract or revoke (...)
    No categories
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  3. William Rehg, Peter McBurney & Simon Parsons (2004). Computer Decision-Support Systems for Public Argumentation: Assessing Deliberative Legitimacy. [REVIEW] AI and Society 19 (3):203-228.
    Recent proposals for computer-assisted argumentation have drawn on dialectical models of argumentation. When used to assist public policy planning, such systems also raise questions of political legitimacy. Drawing on deliberative democratic theory, we elaborate normative criteria for deliberative legitimacy and illustrate their use for assessing two argumentation systems. Full assessment of such systems requires experiments in which system designers draw on expertise from the social sciences and enter into the policy deliberation itself at the level of participants.
    Direct download (6 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  4. Peter McBurney & Simon Parsons (2002). Games That Agents Play: A Formal Framework for Dialogues Between Autonomous Agents. [REVIEW] Journal of Logic, Language and Information 11 (3):315-334.
    We present a logic-based formalism for modeling ofdialogues between intelligent and autonomous software agents,building on a theory of abstract dialogue games which we present.The formalism enables representation of complex dialogues assequences of moves in a combination of dialogue games, and allowsdialogues to be embedded inside one another. The formalism iscomputational and its modular nature enables different types ofdialogues to be represented.
    Direct download (9 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  5. Peter McBurney & Simon Parsons (2001). Dialogue Games in Multi-Agent Systems. Informal Logic 22 (3).
    Formal dialogue games have been studied in philosophy since at least the time of Aristotle. Recently they have been applied in various contexts in computer science and artificial intelligence, particularly as the basis for interaction between autonomous software agents. We review these applications and discuss the many open research questions and challenges at this exciting interface between philosophy and computer science.
    Direct download (14 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation