Corpus ID: 219858148

From formal argumentation to conversational systems

  title={From formal argumentation to conversational systems},
  author={O. Cocarascu and Antonio Rago and F. Toni},
Arguing is amenable to humans and argumentation serves as a natural form of interaction in many settings. Several formal models of argumentation have been proposed in the AI literature as abstractions of various forms of debates. We show how these models can serve as the backbone of conversational systems that can explain machine-computed outputs. These systems can engage in conversations with humans following templates instantiated on argumentation models that are automatically obtained from… Expand

Figures from this paper

ADA-X: A System for Domain-Independent Feature-Based Product Review Aggregation
When looking to buy a product, consumers often look for written reviews to gain insight into its various features. However, many reviews are cluttered with irrelevant information, which makes readingExpand


Coherence and Flexibility in Dialogue Games for Argumentation
A formal framework for dialogue games for argumentation is proposed which imposes an explicit reply structure on dialogues, where each dialogue move either attacks or surrenders to some earlier move of the other participant. Expand
Formal systems for persuasion dialogue
  • H. Prakken
  • Computer Science
  • The Knowledge Engineering Review
  • 2006
The focus of this review will be on regulating the interaction between agents rather than on the design and behaviour of individual agents within a dialogue, taking a game-theoretic view on dialogue systems. Expand
Towards Artificial Argumentation
Recent developments in the field of computational models of argument are leading to technology for artificial argumentation, in the legal, medical, and e-government domains, and interesting tools for argument mining, for debating technologies, and for argumentation solvers are emerging. Expand
A Theoretical Framework for Conversational Search
This paper studies conversational approaches to information retrieval, presenting a theory and model of information interaction in a chat setting, and shows that while theoretical, the model could be practically implemented to satisfy the desirable properties presented. Expand
Dialogical two-agent decision making with assumption-based argumentation
This work connects decision making with multi-agent argumentation and dialogues, using an existing argumentation-based dialogue framework, to show how two agents can argue towards ``good'' decisions in a distributed manner. Expand
Strategic Dialogical Argumentation Using Multi-criteria Decision Making with Application to Epistemic and Emotional Aspects of Arguments
This work presents a framework with implementation for multi-criteria decision making for strategic argumentation, and provides methods to improve the computational viability of the framework and analyze these methods theoretically and empirically. Expand
A Dialogue Game Protocol for Agent Purchase Negotiations
We propose a dialogue game protocol for purchase negotiation dialogues which identifies appropriate speech acts, defines constraints on their utterances, and specifies the different sub-tasks agentsExpand
Argumentation-Based Recommendations: Fantastic Explanations and How to Find Them
This work proposes a hybrid method for calculating predicted ratings, built upon an item/aspect-based graph with users’ partially given ratings, that can be naturally used to provide explanations for recommendations, extracted from user-tailored Tripolar Argumentation Frameworks (TFs). Expand
On the Acceptability of Arguments in Bipolar Argumentation Frameworks
This paper extends the basic abstract argumentation framework, by taking into account two independent kinds of interaction between arguments: a defeat relation and a support relation, and proposes new semantics defined from characteristic properties that a set of arguments must satisfy in order to be an output of the argumentation process. Expand
A Dialogue Game Protocol for Multi-Agent Argument over Proposals for Action
The protocol, called the Persuasive Argument for Multiple Agents (PARMA) Protocol, embodies an earlier theory by the authors of persuasion over action which enables participants to rationally propose, attack, and defend, an action or course of actions (or inaction). Expand