Abstract
The paper presents a first tentative work that investigates the interest and the questions raised by the introduction of argumentation capabilities in multiple criteria decision-making. Emphasizing the positive and the negative aspects of possible choices, by means of arguments in favor or against them is valuable to the user of a decision-support system. In agreement with the symbolic character of arguments, the proposed approach remains qualitative in nature and uses a bipolar scale for the assessment of criteria. The paper formalises a multicriteria decision problem within a logical argumentation system. An illustrative example is provided. Various decision principles are considered, whose psychological validity is assessed by an experimental study.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution.
Buying options
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Learn about institutional subscriptionsPreview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
References
Amgoud, L., Cayrol, C.: Inferring from inconsistency in preference-based argumentation frameworks. International Journal of Automated Reasoning 29(2), 125–169 (2002)
Amgoud, L., Prade, H.: Using arguments for making decisions. In: Proceedings of the 20th Conference on Uncertainty in Artificial Intelligence, pp. 10–17 (2004)
Bonet, B., Geffner, H.: Arguing for decisions: A qualitative model of decision making. In: Proceedings of the 12th Conference on Uncertainty in Artificial Intelligence, pp. 98–105 (1996)
Bonnefon, J.F., Glasspool, D., McCloy, R., Yule, P.: Qualitative decision making: Competing methods for the aggregation of arguments. Technical report (2005)
Chesñevar, C.I., Maguitman, A.G., Loui, R.P.: Logical Models of Argument. ACM Computing Surveys 32(4), 337–383 (2000)
Dubois, D., Fargier, H.: On the qualitative comparison of sets of positive and negative affects. In: Godo, L. (ed.) ECSQARU 2005. LNCS (LNAI), vol. 3571, pp. 305–316. Springer, Heidelberg (2005)
Dubois, D., Prade, H.: Weighted minimum and maximum operations, an addendum to a review of fuzzy set aggregation connectives. Information Sciences 39, 205–210 (1986)
Fox, J., Das, S.: Safe and Sound. Artificial Intelligence in Hazardous Applications. AAAI Press, The MIT Press (2000)
Fox, J., Parsons, S.: On using arguments for reasoning about actions and values. In: Proceedings of the AAAI Spring Symposium on Qualitative Preferences in Deliberation and Practical Reasoning, Stanford (1997)
Franklin, B.: Letter to j. b. priestley, 1772, in the complete works, j. bigelow, ed., pp. 522. Putnam, New York (1887)
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2005 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg
About this paper
Cite this paper
Amgoud, L., Bonnefon, JF., Prade, H. (2005). An Argumentation-Based Approach to Multiple Criteria Decision. In: Godo, L. (eds) Symbolic and Quantitative Approaches to Reasoning with Uncertainty. ECSQARU 2005. Lecture Notes in Computer Science(), vol 3571. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/11518655_24
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/11518655_24
Publisher Name: Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg
Print ISBN: 978-3-540-27326-4
Online ISBN: 978-3-540-31888-0
eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)