Skip to Main content Skip to Navigation
New interface
Conference papers

Empirical Evaluation of Strategies for Multiparty Argumentative Debates

Abstract : Debating agents have often different areas of expertise and conflicting opinions on the subjects under discussion. They are faced with the problem of deciding how to contribute to the current state of the debate in order to satisfy their personal goals. We focus on target sets, that specify minimal changes on the current state of the debate allowing agents to satisfy their goals, where changes are the addition and/or deletion of attacks among arguments. In this paper, we experimentally test a number of strategies based on target sets, and we evaluate them with respect to different criteria, as the length of the debate, the happiness of the agents, and the rationality of the result.
Document type :
Conference papers
Complete list of metadata

Cited literature [16 references]  Display  Hide  Download

https://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/hal-01523774
Contributor : Nicolas Maudet Connect in order to contact the contributor
Submitted on : Tuesday, May 16, 2017 - 9:02:29 PM
Last modification on : Sunday, March 13, 2022 - 3:25:48 AM
Long-term archiving on: : Friday, August 18, 2017 - 12:45:19 AM

File

clima.pdf
Files produced by the author(s)

Identifiers

Citation

Dionysios Kontarinis, Elise Bonzon, Nicolas Maudet, Pavlos Moraitis. Empirical Evaluation of Strategies for Multiparty Argumentative Debates. 15th International Workshop on Computational Logic in Multi-Agent Systems (CLIMA'14), Aug 2014, Prague, Czech Republic. pp.105 - 122, ⟨10.1007/978-3-319-09764-0_7⟩. ⟨hal-01523774⟩

Share

Metrics

Record views

57

Files downloads

92