Formal reconciliatory dialogue based on shift from forward to backward deliberationFootnote^†

† This paper is a revised full version of the conference paper (Kido and Cerutti, Citation2014).

References

• Amgoud, L., Devred, C., & Lagasquie-Schiex, M. (2009). A constrained argumentation system for practical reasoning. In Proceedings of the fifth international workshop on argumentation in multi-agent systems, Estoril, Portugal (pp. 37–56).
   Google Scholar
• Bench-Capon, T. J. M., & Prakken., H. (2006). Justifying actions by accruing arguments. In Proceedings of the 1st international conference on computational models of argument, Liverpool, UK (pp. 247–258).
   Google Scholar
• Black, E., & Hunter, A. (2009). An inquiry dialogue system. JAAMAS, 19, 173–209.
   Google Scholar
• Brett, J. M. (2014). Negotiating globally: How to negotiate deals, resolve disputes, and make decisions across cultural boundaries (Jossey-Bass Business & Management) (3rd ed.). Jossey-Bass, San Francisco, CA, USA.
   Google Scholar
• Carlson, L. (1983). Dialogue games: An approach to discourse analysis. Dordrecht: Reidel Publishing.
   Google Scholar
• Dung, P. M. (1995). On the acceptability of arguments and its fundamental role in nonmonotonic reasoning, logic programming, and n-person games. Artificial Intelligence, 77, 321–357. doi: 10.1016/0004-3702(94)00041-X
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• van Eemeren, F. H., Grootendorst, R., & Henkemans, F. S. (1996). Fundamentals of argumentation theory: A handbook of historical backgrounds and contemporary developments. Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Fan, X., & Toni, F. (2012). Argumentation dialogues for two-agent conflict resolution. In Proceedings of the 4th international conference on computational models of argument, Vienna, Austria (pp. 249–260).
   Google Scholar
• Fisher, R., Ury, W., & Patton, B. (1992). Getting to yes: Negotiating agreement without giving in (2nd ed.). Houghton Mifflin Harcourt, New York, USA.
   Google Scholar
• Hamblin, C. L. (1970). Fallacies. Methuen, London, UK.
   Google Scholar
• Hintikka, J. (1968). Language-games for quantifiers (pp. 46–72). Oxford: Blackwell, in American Philosophical Quarterly Monograph Series 2: Studies in Logical Theory Edition.
   Google Scholar
• Hitchcock, D., McBurney, P., & Parsons, S. (2001). A framework for deliberation dialogues. In Proceedings of the 4th biennial conference of the Ontario Society for the Study of Argumentation, Windsor, Ontario, Canada (pp. 1–24).
   Google Scholar
• Hulstijn, J., & van der Torre, L. (2004). Combining goal generation and planning in an argumentation framework. In Proceedings of the 10th international workshop on non-monotonic reasoning, Whistler, BC, Canada (pp. 212–218).
   Google Scholar
• Kido, H., & Cerutti, F. (2014). Shift from forward to backward deliberation in search of reconciliation. In Proceedings of the 13th Pacific Rim International Conference on Artificial Intelligence (PRICAI 2014), Gold Coast, Queensland, Australia (pp. 920–928).
   Google Scholar
• Kido, H., & Ohsawa, Y. (2013). Justifying underlying desires for argument-based reconciliation. In Proceedings of the 2nd international workshop on Theory and Applications of Formal Argumentation (TAFA 2013), Beijing, China (pp. 143–157).
   Google Scholar
• Kok, E. M., Meyer, J. J. C., Prakken, H., & Vreeswijk, G. A. W. (2010). A formal argumentation framework for deliberation dialogues. In Proceedings of the 7th international workshop on argumentation in multi-agent systems, Toronto, Canada (pp. 31–48).
   Google Scholar
• Kowalski, R. A., & Toni, F. (1994). Argument and reconciliation. In Proceedings of the 5th generation computer systems workshop on application of logic programming to legal reasoning, Tokyo, Japan (pp. 9–16).
   Google Scholar
• Lorenzen, P. (1961). Ein dialogisches konstruktivittskriterium (pp. 193–200). Oxford: Pergamon, in Infinitistic Methods Edition.
   Google Scholar
• McBurney, P., Hitchcock, D., & Parsons, S. (2007). The eightfold way of deliberation dialogue. International Journal of Intelligent Systems, 22(1), 95–132. doi: 10.1002/int.20191
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Modgil, S., & Luck, M. (2009). Argumentation based resolution of conflicts between desires and normative goals. In Proceedings of the 5th international workshop on Argumentation in Multi-Agent Systems (ArgMAS 2009), Estoril, Portugal (pp. 19–36).
   Google Scholar
• Prakken, H. (2005). Coherence and flexibility in dialogue games for argumentation. Journal of Logic and Computation, 15, 1009–1040. doi: 10.1093/logcom/exi046
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Prakken, H. (2006). Formal systems for persuasion dialogue. The Knowledge Engineering Review, 21(2), 163–188. doi: 10.1017/S0269888906000865
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rahwan, I., Pasquier, P., Sonenberg, L., & Dignum, F. (2007). On the benefits of exploiting underlying goals in argument-based negotiation. In Proceedings of the 22nd national conference on artificial intelligence (AAAI 2007), Vancouver, BC, Canada (pp. 116–121).
   Google Scholar
• Wells, S., & Reed, C. (2006). Knowing when to bargain. In Proceedings of the 1st international conference on computational models of argument, Liverpool, UK (pp. 235–246).
   Google Scholar