Abstract
This paper proposes a system that allows a group of human users to share their cultural experiences online, like buying together a gift from a museum or browsing simultaneously the collection of this museum. We show that such application involves two multiple criteria decision problems for choosing between different alternatives (e.g. possible gifts): one at the level of each user, and one at the level of the group for making joint decisions. The former is made manually by the users via the WeShare interface. This interface displays an image with tags reflecting some features (criteria) of the image. Each user expresses then his opinion by rating the image and each tag. A user may change his choices in light of a report provided by his WeShare agent on the opinion of the group. Joint decisions are made in an automatic way. We provide a negotiation protocol which shows how they are reached. Both types of decisions are based on the notion of argument. Indeed, a tag which is liked by a user constitutes an argument pro the corresponding image whereas a tag which is disliked gives birth to a cons argument. These arguments may have different strengths since a user may express to what extent he likes/dislikes a given tag. Finally, the opinion analysis performed by a WeShare agent consists of aggregating the arguments of the users.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Preview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
References
Albert, C., Amgoud, L., Costedoat, C., Bannay, D., Saint-Dizier, P.: Introdcing argumentation in opinion analysis: Language and reasoning challenges. In: Proc. of Sentiment Analysis where AI meets Psychology (Workshop at IJCNLP 2011) (2011)
Amgoud, L., Besnard, P.: Bridging the Gap between Abstract Argumentation Systems and Logic. In: Godo, L., Pugliese, A. (eds.) SUM 2009. LNCS, vol. 5785, pp. 12–27. Springer, Heidelberg (2009)
Amgoud, L., Dimopoulos, Y., Moraitis, P.: A unified and general framework for argumentation-based negotiation. In: Proc. of the 6th International Joint Conference on Autonomous Agents and Multiagent Systems (AAMAS 2007), pp. 963–970. ACM Press (2007)
Amgoud, L., Prade, H.: Using arguments for making and explaining decisions. Artificial Intelligence Journal 173, 413–436 (2009)
Arcos, J.L., Esteva, M., Noriega, P., Rodríguez-Aguilar, J.A., Sierra, C.: Engineering open environments with electronic institutions. Engineering Applications of Artificial Intelligence 18(2), 191–204 (2005)
Atkinson, K., Bench-Capon, T., McBurney, P.: Justifying practical reasoning. In: Proc. of the Fourth Workshop on Computational Models of Natural Argument (CMNA 2004), pp. 87–90 (2004)
Besnard, P., Hunter, A.: Elements of Argumentation. MIT Press (2008)
Bonet, B., Geffner, H.: Arguing for decisions: A qualitative model of decision making. In: Proc. of the 12th Conference on Uncertainty in Artificial Intelligence (UAI 1996), pp. 98–105 (1996)
Bonnefon, J.F., Fargier, H.: Comparing sets of positive and negative arguments: Empirical assessment of seven qualitative rules. In: Proc. of the 17th European Conference on Artificial Intelligence (ECAI 2006), pp. 16–20 (2006)
d’Inverno, M., Luck, M., Noriega, P., Rodríguez-Aguilar, J.A., Sierra, C.: Communicating open systems. Artificial Intelligence (in print, 2012)
Dubois, D., Fargier, H.: Qualitative decision making with bipolar information. In: Proc. of the 10th International Conference on Principles of Knowledge Representation and Reasoning (KR 2006), pp. 175–186 (2006)
Dung, P.M.: On the acceptability of arguments and its fundamental role in nonmonotonic reasoning, logic programming and n-person games. Artificial Intelligence Journal 77, 321–357 (1995)
Higgins, C.: Arts funding cut 30% in spending review (2010), guardian.co.uk
Krishna-Bal, B., Saint-Dizier, P.: Towards building annotated resources for analyzing opinions and argumentation in news editorials. In: Proc. of the International Conference on Language Resources and Evaluation (2010)
Newman, K., Tourle, P.: The ImpacT of cuTs on uK museums A report for the Museums Association (2011)
Osman, N., Sierra, C., Sabater, J.: Propagation of opinions in structural graphs. In: Proc. of the 17th European Conference on Artificial Intelligence, ECAI 2006 (2006)
Pollock, J.: How to reason defeasibly. Artificial Intelligence Journal 57, 1–42 (1992)
Prakken, H.: Coherence and flexibility in dialogue games for argumentation. Journal of Logic and Computation 15, 1009–1040 (2005)
Prakken, H., Sartor, G.: Argument-based extended logic programming with defeasible priorities. Journal of Applied Non-Classical Logics 7, 25–75 (1997)
Subrahmanian, V.: Mining online opinions. IEEE Computer, 88–90 (2009)
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2012 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg
About this paper
Cite this paper
Amgoud, L. et al. (2012). Sharing Online Cultural Experiences: An Argument-Based Approach. In: Torra, V., Narukawa, Y., López, B., Villaret, M. (eds) Modeling Decisions for Artificial Intelligence. MDAI 2012. Lecture Notes in Computer Science(), vol 7647. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-34620-0_26
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-34620-0_26
Publisher Name: Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg
Print ISBN: 978-3-642-34619-4
Online ISBN: 978-3-642-34620-0
eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)