ArgMAS 2004

 **************************************
First International Workshop on
Argumentation in Multi-Agent Systems
(ArgMAS 2004)
*************************************


Mon 19, July 2004, Columbia University, NY, USA
http://web.dis.unimelb.edu.au/pgrad/iyadr/argmas

In Conjunction with AAMAS 2004
(See AAMAS website for registration)
http://satchmo.cs.columbia.edu/aamas04/

Program:

**************
INVITED TALK:
**************
Argument as Belief-Monitoring
Prof. Jonathan Adler, Faculty of Philosophy, City University of New York
Abstract:
Argument is generally conceived as aiming at rational persuasion. However,
argument serves another crucial cognitive function: It is a device of belief
self-correction. By arguing with an agent, whose judgments I do not control,
yet which are coordinated with mine, I can uncover weaknesses in my own
beliefs, and weaknesses that I am barred from even recognizing by the very
fact of belief. Similarly, perception, memory, simple reasoning, and
testimony are generally viewed as reliable ways to acquire good information
(new beliefs). But these are also on-going mechanisms to monitor, and so
correct or revise, beliefs. I want to explore the value of argument as a
second-order monitoring system of self-correction, and for the conceptual
and modeling problems this role raises.

**************
FULL PAPERS:
**************
- - Some preliminary steps towards a meta-theory for formal inter-agent
dialogues
Simon Parsons, Peter McBurney and Michael Wooldridge

- - Formal Dialectic Specification
Simon Wells and Chris Reed

- - Towards a formal and implemented model of argumentation schemes in agent
communication
Chris Reed and Doug Walton

- - On the generation of bipolar goals in argumentation-based negotiation
Leila Amgoud and Souhila Kaci

- - Is it worth arguing?
Nishan C. Karunatillake and Nicholas R. Jennings

- - Bargaining and argument-based negotiation: some preliminary comparisons
Iyad Rahwan, Liz Sonenberg and Peter McBurney

- - A Bayes Net approach to argumentation-based negotiation
Sabyasachi Saha and Sandip Sen

- - When is it okay to lie? A simple model of contradiction in agent-based
dialogues
Elizabeth Sklar, Simon Parsons and Mathew Davies

- - Layered strategies and protocols for argumentation-based interaction
Antonis Kakas, Nicolas Maudet and Pavlos Moraitis

- - A dialogue game protocol for multiagent argument over proposals for action
Katie Atkinson, Trevor Bench-Capon and Peter McBurney

- - A Persuasion Dialogue Game based on Commitments and Arguments
Jamal Bentahar, Bernard Moulin and Brahim Chaib-draa

- - An argument-based framework to model an agent's beliefs in a dynamic
environment
M. Capobianco, C.I. Chesnevar and G.R. Simari

- - Revising beliefs through arguments: bridging the gap between argumentation
and belief revision in MAS
Fabio Paglieri and Cristiano Castelfranchi

***********************
POSITION STATEMENTS:
***********************
- - Communicating Conventions of Argumentation-based Dialogue Games
Jarred P. McGinnis

- - Evidence and Argumentation based Risk Assessment
Will Shenton, Trent Cain, Ryan How