We address the collaborative planning problem in teams of agents where partners have dierent objectives and norms. In this context, agreeing on the best course of action to adopt represents a significant challenge. Concurrent actions and causal plan-constraints may lead to conflicts of opinion on what to do. Moreover, individual norms can constrain agent behaviour. We propose an argumentation-based model for deliberative dialogues based on argumentation schemes. This model facilitates agreements about joint plans by enriching the quality of the dialogue through the exchange of relevant information about plan commitments and norms.
|Name||Lecture Notes in Computer Science|
|Publisher||Springer Berlin Heidelberg|
|Conference||14th International Conference, PRIMA 2011|
|Period||16/11/11 → 18/11/11|
- argumentation schemes
- practical reasoning