A Two-Phase Dialogue Game for Skeptical Preferred Semantics

Abstract

Abstract. In this paper we propose a labelling based dialogue game for determining whether a single argument within a Dung argumentation framework is skeptically preferred. Our game consists of two phases, and determines the membership of a single argument within the extension, assuming optimal play by dialogue participants. In the first phase, one player attempts to advance arguments to construct an extension not containing the argument under consideration, while the second phase verifies that the extension is indeed a preferred one. Correctness within this basic game requires perfect play by both players, and we therefore also introduce an overarching game to overcome this limitation.

Resilience, reliability, and coordination in autonomous multi-agent systems

“…Moreover, as part of the EPSRC funded "Scrutable Autonomous Systems" project, the A 3 group made use of their expertise to design a tool based on argumentation to explain automated planning [7], allowing for humans and agents to coordinate actions. Much of this project examined efficient proof dialogues for providing such explanation [76], as well approaches to knowledge representation which can naturally lead to argumentative structures [77].…”