Abstract
We present a formal decision-making framework, where decisions have multiple attributes and meet goals, and preferences are defined over individual goals and sets of goals. We define decision functions to select ‘good’ decisions according to an underlying decision criteria. We also define an argumentation-based computational mechanism to compute and explain ‘good’ decisions. We draw connections between decision-making and argumentation semantics: ‘good’ decisions are admissible arguments in a corresponding argumentation framework. To show the applicability of our approach, we use medical literature selection as a case study. For a given patient description, we select the most relevant medical papers from the medical literature and explain the selection.
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
Amgoud, L., Prade, H.: Using arguments for making and explaining decisions. Art. Int. 173(3-4) (2009)
Boutilier, C., Brafman, R.I., Domshlak, C., Hoos, H.H., Poole, D.: Cp-nets: A tool for representing and reasoning with conditional ceteris paribus preference statements. JAIR 21, 135–191 (2004)
Dung, P.M., Kowalski, R.A., Toni, F.: Assumption-based argumentation. In: Argumentation in AI, pp. 25–44. Springer (2009)
Dung, P.M., Thang, P.M., Toni, F.: Towards argumentation-based contract negotiation. In: Proc. COMMA (2008)
Dung, P., Kowalski, R., Toni, F.: Dialectic proof procedures for assumption-based, admissible argumentation. AIJ 170, 114–159 (2006)
Fan, X., Toni, F.: Decision making with assumption-based argumentation. In: Proc. TAFA (2013)
Fox, J., Glasspool, D., Patkar, V., Austin, M., Black, L., South, M., Robertson, D., Vincent, C.: Delivering clinical support services: There is nothing as practical as a good theory. J. of Biom. Inf. 43(5) (2010)
Fox, J., Krause, P., Elvang-Gøransson, M.: Argumentation as a general framework for uncertain reasoning. In: Proc. UAI, pp. 428–434 (1993)
Matt, P.-A., Toni, F., Vaccari, J.R.: Dominant decisions by argumentation agents. In: McBurney, P., Rahwan, I., Parsons, S., Maudet, N. (eds.) ArgMAS 2009. LNCS, vol. 6057, pp. 42–59. Springer, Heidelberg (2010)
Nawwab, F.S., Bench-Capon, T.J.M., Dunne, P.E.: A methodology for action-selection using value-based argumentation. In: Proc. COMMA, pp. 264–275 (2008)
Yoon, K.P., Hwang, C.L.: Multiple Attribute Decision Making: An Introduction. Sage Publications Inc. (March 1995)
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2013 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg
About this paper
Cite this paper
Fan, X., Craven, R., Singer, R., Toni, F., Williams, M. (2013). Assumption-Based Argumentation for Decision-Making with Preferences: A Medical Case Study. In: Leite, J., Son, T.C., Torroni, P., van der Torre, L., Woltran, S. (eds) Computational Logic in Multi-Agent Systems. CLIMA 2013. Lecture Notes in Computer Science(), vol 8143. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-40624-9_23
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-40624-9_23
Publisher Name: Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg
Print ISBN: 978-3-642-40623-2
Online ISBN: 978-3-642-40624-9
eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)