Abstract
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 the proposal, thereby permitting proposals, entreaties, commands, promises, etc., to be distinguished semantically.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Amgoud, L., N. Maudet and S. Parsons: 2000, ‹Modelling Dialogues Using Argumentation’, in E. Durfee (ed.), Proceedings of the Fourth International Conference on Multi-Agent Systems (ICMAS 2000), IEEE Press, Boston, MA, pp. 31–38
Austin J. L. (1962) How to do Things with Words. Oxford University Press, Oxford
Bench-Capon T. J. M., Geldard T., Leng P. H. (2000) A Method for the Computational Modelling of Dialectical Argument with Dialogue Games. Artificial Intelligence and Law 8:233–254
Bratu, M., J. M. Andreoli, O. Boissier and S. Castellani: 2002, ‹A Software Infrastructure for Negotiation within Inter-organisational Alliances’, in J. Padget, D. C. Parkes, N.␣M. Sadeh, O. Shehory and W. E. Walsh (eds.), AMEC-IV: Designing Mechanisms and Systems, Lecture Notes in Artificial Intelligence 2531. Springer, Berlin, pp.␣161–179
Colombetti, M. and M. Verdicchio: 2002, ‹An Analysis of Agent Speech Acts as Institutional Actions’, in C. Castelfranchi and W. L. Johnson (eds.), Proceedings of the First International Joint Conference on Autonomous Agents and Multi-Agent Systems (AAMAS 2002), ACM Press, New York, pp. 1157–1164
FIPA: 2002, Communicative Act Library Specification (Standard SC00037J), Foundation for Intelligent Physical Agents. Retrieved September 14, 2007 from http://www.fipa. org/specs/fipa00037/SC00037J.html
Gell A. (1998) Art and Agency: An Anthropological Theory. Clarendon Press, Oxford
Gunter C. A. (1992) Semantics of Programming Languages: Structures and Techniques. MIT Press, Cambridge, MA
Habermas, J.: 1984, The Theory of Communicative Action: Volume 1: Reason and the Rationalization of Society, Heinemann, London (translation by T. McCarthy of: Theorie des Kommunikativen Handelns, Band I, Handlungsrationalitat und gesellschaftliche Rationalisierung, Suhrkamp, Frankfurt, 1981)
Hamblin C. L. (1970) Fallacies. Methuen, London
Hitchcock, D.: 1991, ‹Some Principles of Rational Mutual Inquiry’, in F. van Eemeren, R.␣Grootendorst, J. A. Blair and C. A. Willard (eds.), Proceedings of the Second International Conference on Argumentation (ISSA 1991), SICSAT, Amsterdam, pp.␣236–243
Jennings N. R., Faratin P., Lomuscio A. R., Parsons S., Wooldridge M., Sierra C. (2001) Automated Negotiation: Prospects, Methods and Challenges. Group Decision and Negotiation 10:199–215
Johnson, M. W., P. McBurney and S. Parsons: 2003, ‹When are Two Protocols the Same?’, in M.-P. Huget (ed.), Communication in Multi-Agent Systems: Agent Communication Languages and Conversation Policies, Lecture Notes in Artificial Intelligence 2650. Springer, Berlin, pp. 253–268
Kamp H., Reyle U. (1993) From Discourse to Logic: Introduction to Modeltheoretic Semantics of Natural Language, Formal Logic and Discourse Representation Theory. Kluwer, Dordrecht
Krabbe E. C. W. (2001) The Problem of Retraction in Critical Discussion. Synthese 127:141–159
Mac Lane S. (1998) Categories for the Working Mathematician. Springer, New York
McBurney P., Parsons S. (2002) Games that Agents Play: A Formal Framework for Dialogues between Autonomous Agents. Journal of Logic, Language and Information 11:315–334
McBurney P. and S. Parsons: 2005a, ‹A Denotational Semantics for Deliberation Dialogues’, in I. Rahwan, P. Moraitis and C. Reed (eds.), Argumentation in Multi-Agent Systems, Lecture Notes in Artificial Intelligence 3366. Springer, Berlin, pp. 162–175
McBurney P. and S. Parsons: 2005b, ‹Locutions for Argumentation in Agent Interaction Protocols’, in R. M. van Eijk, M.-P. Huget and F. Dignum (eds.), Developments in Agent Communication, Lecture Notes in Artificial Intelligence 3396. Springer, Berlin, pp. 227–244
McBurney P., van Eijk R. M., Parsons S., Amgoud L. (2003) A Dialogue-Game Protocol for Agent Purchase Negotiations. Journal of Autonomous Agents and Multi-Agent Systems 7:235–273
Searle J. (1969) Speech Acts: An Essay in the Philosophy of Language. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge
Singh M. P. (1999) An Ontology for Commitments in Multiagent Systems: Toward a Unification of Normative Concepts. Artificial Intelligence and Law 7:97–113
Viroli, M. and A. Ricci: 2004, ‹Instructions-Based Semantics of Agent-Mediated Interaction’, in N. R. Jennings, C. Sierra, E. Sonenberg and M. Tambe (eds.), Proceedings of the Third International Joint Conference on Autonomous Agents and Multi-Agent Systems (AAMAS 2004), ACM Press, New York, pp. 102–109
Walton D. N., Krabbe E. C. W. (1995) Commitment in Dialogue: Basic Concepts of Interpersonal Reasoning. State University of New York Press, Albany, NY
Wooldridge M. J. (2000) Semantic Issues in the Verification of Agent Communication Languages. Journal of Autonomous Agents and Multi-Agent Systems 3:9–31
Wooldridge M. J., Jennings N. R., Kinny D. (2000) The Gaia Methodology for Agent-Oriented Analysis and Design. Journal of Autonomous Agents and Multi-Agent Systems 3:285–312
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
McBurney, P., Parsons, S. Retraction and Revocation in Agent Deliberation Dialogs. Argumentation 21, 269–289 (2007). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10503-007-9057-8
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10503-007-9057-8