A Framework for Argumentation-Based Agent Negotiation in Uncertain Settings

Automated negotiation technologies are being increasingly used in business applications, especially in the e-Commerce domain. Argumentation-Based Negotiation (ABN), among the existing approaches, has been distinguished as a powerful approach to automated negotiation due to its ability to provide more sophisticated information (arguments) that justifies and supports agents’ proposals in order to mutually influence their preference relations on the set of offers, and consequently on the negotiation outcome. During the recent years, argumentation-based negotiation has received a considerable attention in the area of agent communication. However, current proposals are mostly concerned with presenting protocols for showing how agents can interact with each other, and how arguments and offers can be generated, evaluated and exchanged under the assumption of certainty. Therefore, none of these proposals is directly targeting the agents’ uncertainty about the selection of their moves nor designing the appropriate negotiation strategies based on this uncertainty in order to help the negotiating agents better make their decisions in the negotiation settings where agents have limited or uncertain information, precluding them from making optimal individual decisions. In this thesis, we tackle the aforementioned problems by advocating an Argumentation-Based Agent Negotiation (ABAN) framework that is capable of handling the problem of agents’ uncertainty during the negotiation process. We begin by proposing an argumentation framework enriched with a new element called agent’s uncertainty as an important parameter in the agent theory to allow negotiating agents to decide which moves to play and reason about the selection of these moves under the assumption of uncertainty. Then, a method for agents’ uncertainty assessment is presented. In particular, we use Shannon entropy to assess agent’s uncertainty about their moves at each dialogue step as well as for the whole dialogue. Negotiation strategies and agent profiles issues are also explored and a methodology for designing novel negotiation strategies and agent profiles under the assumption of uncertainty is developed. Moreover, two important outcome properties namely, completeness and Nash equilibrium are discussed. Finally, the applicability of our framework is explored through several scenarios of the well-known Buyer/Seller case study. The obtained empirical results confirm the effectiveness of using our uncertainty-aware techniques and demonstrate the usefulness of using such techniques in argumentation-based negotiations

Argumentation in school science : Breaking the tradition of authoritative exposition through a pedagogy that promotes discussion and reasoning

The value of argumentation in science education has become internationally recognised and has been the subject of many research studies in recent years. Successful introduction of argumentation activities in learning contexts involves extending teaching goals beyond the understanding of facts and concepts, to include an emphasis on cognitive and metacognitive processes, epistemic criteria and reasoning. The authors focus on the difficulties inherent in shifting a tradition of teaching from one dominated by authoritative exposition to one that is more dialogic, involving small-group discussion based on tasks that stimulate argumentation. The paper builds on previous research on enhancing the quality of argument in school science, to focus on how argumentation activities have been designed, with appropriate strategies, resources and modelling, for pedagogical purposes. The paper analyses design frameworks, their contexts and lesson plans, to evaluate their potential for enhancing reasoning through foregrounding the processes of argumentation. Examples of classroom dialogue where teachers adopt the frameworks/plans are analysed to show how argumentation processes are scaffolded. The analysis shows that several layers of interpretation are needed and these layers need to be aligned for successful implementation. The analysis serves to highlight the potential and limitations of the design frameworks

From conditioning to learning communities: Implications of fifty years of research in e‐learning interaction design

This paper will consider e‐learning in terms of the underlying learning processes and interactions that are stimulated, supported or favoured by new media and the contexts or communities in which it is used. We will review and critique a selection of research and development from the past fifty years that has linked pedagogical and learning theory to the design of innovative e‐learning systems and activities, and discuss their implications. It will include approaches that are, essentially, behaviourist (Skinner and Gagné), cognitivist (Pask, Piaget and Papert), situated (Lave, Wenger and Seely‐Brown), socio‐constructivist (Vygotsky), socio‐cultural (Nardi and Engestrom) and community‐based (Wenger and Preece). Emerging from this review is the argument that effective e‐learning usually requires, or involves, high‐quality educational discourse, that leads to, at the least, improved knowledge, and at the best, conceptual development and improved understanding. To achieve this I argue that we need to adopt a more holistic approach to design that synthesizes features of the included approaches, leading to a framework that emphasizes the relationships between cognitive changes, dialogue processes and the communities, or contexts for e‐learning

Supporting undergraduate students’ acquisition of academic argumentation strategies through computer conferencing

Executive Summary Background This research grows out of work on the importance of argumentation in developingstudents’ critical abilities. It focuses attention on how students argue in computer mediated conferences as opposed to traditionalwritten assignments, investigating the way in which argumentation is realised within the relatively new context of computer conferencing which allows extended written discussions to take place overa period of weeks. Such text-based asynchronous conferencing is typically characterised by features of both spoken and written modes. Aims The main aims of the project were: • to investigate the argumentation strategies used in asynchronous text-based computer conferences; • to compare the argumentation strategies developed through conferencing with those used in the writing of academic assignments; • to examine the strategies used by tutors to encourage and facilitate argumentation in text-based computer conferences. Methods Data was collected over two years for the distance undergraduate course ‘Perspectives on Complementary and Alternative Medicine’ at the Open University.Qualitative data was obtained through interviews with the course chair, tutors and students, and through a student questionnaire. Assignments and computer-mediated tutorials were collected for textual analysis, although the timing of the assignments meant that analysis has only just begun on the essay data. To analyse the argumentation in the computer conferences and assignments a method of categorising, coding and tracking argumentative discourse was developed building on earlier work by the authors. In addition, computational searches were carried out to compare linguistic features across conference and assignment data. Results In tutorial conferences, student discussion tended to take the form of collaborative co-construction of an argument through exchanging information and experience to substantiate a position. However, students were also prepared to challenge other viewpoints. In both cases, they frequently drew on personal and professional experience to support argument claims. The use of these strategies suggests that text-based conferencing lends itself to the collective combining of diverse sources of information, experiences and ideas. Conference discussions were often personalised with fewer explicit logical links marking argument structure. They were also marked by complexity of argument strands, many of which reached no conclusion. Preliminary analysis of argumentation in assignments suggests that this did not, however, adversely affect students’ ability to create a more traditional, linear argument in their essays. Further analysis will be undertaken to compare argumentation strategies across the two sets of data. Tutors expressed concern about levels of participation in the tutorial conferences, which varied quite considerably. They also felt uncertain about their own knowledge of appropriate pedagogic strategies which would encourage students to participate in a collaborative yet critical way, and tended to rely on strategies from face-to-face teaching. Analysis of the conference discussion showed that tutors made fewer claims than students and were also less likely to provide information in support of their claims. There was, therefore, little modelling by tutors of the basic type of argumentation that would be expected in formal written assignments.Despite these concerns, student responses indicated that having a tutor and a group of peers to interact with, or just to observe, was valued as a supportive feature of this form of distance learning. No clear picture arose of how to make conferencing more interactive for more students, and this reinforces the sense gained from the tutor interviews of the difficulty of proposing a model of tutoring in computer conferences that will necessarily engage all students or raise the level of discussion and debate. Conclusions Our study suggests that text-based conferencing has an important role to play in developing students’ argumentation strategies and understanding of academic discourse and conventions. In view of its hybrid nature, somewhere between spontaneous speech and formal academic writing, course designers and tutors should aim to take advantage of both aspects – on the one hand, the informal dialogic exchange of opinions and co-construction of knowledge, and on the other,the opportunity for consolidation, reflection and re-positioning. Our findings reinforce the view that students’ willingness to exchange ideas freely and openly is partly a consequence of how personally engaged, at ease and confident students feel with one another and their tutor. In particular, it seems that there is a role for the interpersonal and, to some extent, the chat and the frivolity, which in some other studies discussed in the literature review have been regarded as negative influences. Recommendations To facilitate students’ development of argumentation and learning more generally,tutors need greater awareness of the ways in which academic argumentation operates in computer conferencing as compared to written assignments. Since pedagogic strategies developed in other contexts may not transfer well to computer conferencing, there is a need for targeted professional development, focussing in particular on: • Choosing topics for discussion and designing effective task prompts; • Supporting weaker students; • Encouraging challenging of ideas; • Finding the right tone to facilitate peer discussions. Some specific suggestions are made within the report, but our recommendations at this stage remain tentative as we still have to complete the analysis of the assignment data and draw conclusions about the impact of the computer conferencing on the quality of written argumentation within this more formal context

Enhancing the Quality of Argumentation in School Science

The research reported in this paper focussed on the design of learning environments that support the teaching and learning of argumentation in a scientific context. The research took place over two years between 1999 and 2001 in junior high schools in the greater London area. The research was conducted in two phases. In the first developmental phase, working with a group of 12 science teachers, the main emphasis was to develop sets of materials and strategies to support argumentation in the classroom and to assess teachers‘ development with teaching argumentation. Data were collected by videoing and audio recording the teachers attempts to implement these lessons at the beginning and end of the year. During this phase, analytical tools for evaluating the quality of argumentation were developed based on Toulmin‘s argument pattern. Analysis of the data shows that there was significant development in the majority of teachers use of argumentation across the year. Results indicate that the pattern of use of argumentation is teacher specific, as is the nature of the change. In the second phase of the project, teachers taught the experimental groups a minimum of nine lessons which involved socioscientific or scientific argumentation. In addition, these teachers taught similar lessons to a control group at the beginning and end of the year. Here the emphasis lay on assessing the progression in student capabilities with argumentation. Hence data were collected from several lessons of two groups of students engaging in argumentation. Using a framework for evaluating the nature of the discourse and its quality, the findings show that there was an improvement in the quality of students‘ argumentation. In addition, the research offers methodological developments for work in this field

Arguing and negotiating in the presence of social influences

Postprin

Supporting Computer-supported collaborative work (CSCW) in conceptual design

In order to gain a better understanding of online conceptual collaborative design processes this paper investigates how student designers make use of a shared virtual synchronous environment when engaged in conceptual design. The software enables users to talk to each other and share sketches when they are remotely located. The paper describes a novel methodology for observing and analysing collaborative design processes by adapting the concepts of grounded theory. Rather than concentrating on narrow aspects of the final artefacts, emerging “themes” are generated that provide a broader picture of collaborative design process and context descriptions. Findings on the themes of “grounding – mutual understanding” and “support creativity” complement findings from other research, while important themes associated with “near-synchrony” have not been emphasised in other research. From the study, a series of design recommendations are made for the development of tools to support online computer-supported collaborative work in design using a shared virtual environment

Sketch-Based Interfaces to Support Collaborative Conceptual Design Learning

In order to gain a better understanding of online collaborative conceptual design processes this paper investigates how student designers make use of Lyceum, a shared virtual synchronous environment when engaged in conceptual design. The software enables users to talk to each other and share sketches when they are remotely located. The paper describes a novel methodology for observing and analysing collaborative design processes by adapting the concepts of grounded theory. Rather than concentrating on narrow aspects of the final artefacts, emerging 'themes' are generated that provide a broader picture of collaborative design process and context descriptions. Findings on the themes of 'grounding – mutual understanding' and 'support creativity' complement findings from other research, while important themes associated with 'near-synchrony' have not been emphasised in other research. From the study, a series of design recommendations are made for the development of tools to support online computer-supported collaborative work in design using a shared virtual environment

Analytic frameworks for assessing dialogic argumentation in online learning environments

Over the last decade, researchers have developed sophisticated online learning environments to support students engaging in argumentation. This review first considers the range of functionalities incorporated within these online environments. The review then presents five categories of analytic frameworks focusing on (1) formal argumentation structure, (2) normative quality, (3) nature and function of contributions within the dialog, (4) epistemic nature of reasoning, and (5) patterns and trajectories of participant interaction. Example analytic frameworks from each category are presented in detail rich enough to illustrate their nature and structure. This rich detail is intended to facilitate researchers’ identification of possible frameworks to draw upon in developing or adopting analytic methods for their own work. Each framework is applied to a shared segment of student dialog to facilitate this illustration and comparison process. Synthetic discussions of each category consider the frameworks in light of the underlying theoretical perspectives on argumentation, pedagogical goals, and online environmental structures. Ultimately the review underscores the diversity of perspectives represented in this research, the importance of clearly specifying theoretical and environmental commitments throughout the process of developing or adopting an analytic framework, and the role of analytic frameworks in the future development of online learning environments for argumentation