Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Reasons and Options for Updating an Opponent Model in Persuasion Dialogues

  • Conference paper
  • First Online:
Theory and Applications of Formal Argumentation (TAFA 2015)

Part of the book series: Lecture Notes in Computer Science ((LNAI,volume 9524))

Abstract

Dialogical argumentation allows agents to interact by constructing and evaluating arguments through a dialogue. Numerous proposals have been made for protocols for dialogical argumentation, and recently there is interest in developing better strategies for agents to improve their own outcomes from the interaction by using an opponent model to guide their strategic choices. However, there is a lack of clear formal reasons for why or how such a model might be useful, or how it can be maintained. In this paper, we consider a simple type of persuasion dialogue, investigate options for using and updating an opponent model, and identify conditions under which such use of a model is beneficial.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 39.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 54.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

References

  1. Modgil, S., et al.: The added value of argumentation. In: Ossowski, S. (ed.) Agreement Technologies. Law, Governance and Technology Series, vol. 8, pp. 357–403. Springer, Heidelberg (2013)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  2. Prakken, H.: Formal systems for persuasion dialogue. Knowl. Eng. Rev. 21(02), 163–188 (2006)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Black, E., Atkinson, K.: Choosing persuasive arguments for action. In: 10th International Conference on Autonomous Agents and Multiagent Systems, pp. 905–912 (2011)

    Google Scholar 

  4. Thimm, M.: Strategic argumentation in multi-agent systems. Künstliche Intelligenz, Spec. Issue Multi-Agent Decis. Making 28(3), 159–168 (2014)

    Google Scholar 

  5. Black, E., Coles, A., Bernardini, S.: Automated planning of simple persuasion dialogues. In: Bulling, N., van der Torre, L., Villata, S., Jamroga, W., Vasconcelos, W. (eds.) CLIMA 2014. LNCS, vol. 8624, pp. 87–104. Springer, Heidelberg (2014)

    Google Scholar 

  6. Rienstra, T., Thimm, M., Oren, N.: Opponent models with uncertainty for strategic argumentation. In: 23rd International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence, pp. 332–338 (2013)

    Google Scholar 

  7. Hadjinikolis, C., Siantos, Y., Modgil, S., Black, E., McBurney, P.: Opponent modelling in persuasion dialogues. In: 23rd International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence, pp. 164–170 (2013)

    Google Scholar 

  8. Hadjinikolis, C., Modgil, S., Black, E.: Building support-based opponent models in persuasion dialogues. In: Theory and Applications of Formal Argumentation: Third International Workshop, TAFA 2015, Buenos Aires, Argentina, 25–26 July 2015, Revised Selected papers. Springer LNAI 9524 (2016)

    Google Scholar 

  9. Dung, P.M.: On the acceptability of arguments and its fundamental role in nonmonotonic reasoning, logic programming and \(n\)-person games. Artif. Intell. 77(2), 321–357 (1995)

    Article  MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  10. Modgil, S., Prakken, H.: A general account of argumentation with preferences. Artif. Intell. 195, 361–397 (2013)

    Article  MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  11. Hunter, A.: Modelling the persuadee in asymmetric argumentation dialogues for persuasion. In: 24th International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence, pp. 3055–3061 (2015)

    Google Scholar 

  12. Hunter, A.: Probabilistic strategies in dialogical argumentation. In: Straccia, U., Calì, A. (eds.) SUM 2014. LNCS, vol. 8720, pp. 190–202. Springer, Heidelberg (2014)

    Google Scholar 

  13. Oren, N., Atkinson, K., Li, H.: Group persuasion through uncertain audience modelling. In: 4th International Conference on Computational Models of Argument, pp. 350–357 (2012)

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

This work was partially supported by the the UK Engineering and Physical Sciences Research Council, grant ref. EP/M01892X/1.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Informatics, King’s College London, London, UK

    Elizabeth Black

  2. Department of Computer Science, University College London, London, UK

    Anthony Hunter

Authors
  1. Elizabeth Black
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Anthony Hunter
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Elizabeth Black .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. King's College London, London, United Kingdom

    Elizabeth Black

  2. Strand Building;Strand Campus, King's College London, London, United Kingdom

    Sanjay Modgil

  3. Department of Computing Science, University of Aberdeen, Aberdeen, United Kingdom

    Nir Oren

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2015 Springer International Publishing Switzerland

About this paper

Cite this paper

Black, E., Hunter, A. (2015). Reasons and Options for Updating an Opponent Model in Persuasion Dialogues. In: Black, E., Modgil, S., Oren, N. (eds) Theory and Applications of Formal Argumentation. TAFA 2015. Lecture Notes in Computer Science(), vol 9524. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-28460-6_2

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-28460-6_2

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-319-28459-0

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-319-28460-6

  • eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation