Knowledge sharing in the health scenario

The understanding of certain data often requires the collection of similar data from different places to be analysed and interpreted. Interoperability standards and ontologies, are facilitating data interchange around the world. However, beyond the existing networks and advances for data transfer, data sharing protocols to support multilateral agreements are useful to exploit the knowledge of distributed Data Warehouses. The access to a certain data set in a federated Data Warehouse may be constrained by the requirement to deliver another specific data set. When bilateral agreements between two nodes of a network are not enough to solve the constraints for accessing to a certain data set, multilateral agreements for data exchange are needed. We present the implementation of a Multi-Agent System for multilateral exchange agreements of clinical data, and evaluate how those multilateral agreements increase the percentage of data collected by a single node from the total amount of data available in the network. Different strategies to reduce the number of messages needed to achieve an agreement are also considered. The results show that with this collaborative sharing scenario the percentage of data collected dramaticaly improve from bilateral agreements to multilateral ones, up to reach almost all data available in the network.Peer ReviewedPostprint (published version

Trusting the messenger because of the message: feedback dynamics from information quality to source evaluation

Published Online: 28 August 2013International audienceInformation provided by a source should be assessed by an intelligent agent on the basis of several criteria: most notably, its content and the trust one has in its source. In turn, the observed quality of information should feed back on the assessment of its source, and such feedback should intelligently distribute among different features of the source--e.g., competence and sincerity. We propose a formal framework in which trust is treated as a multi-dimensional concept relativized to the sincerity of the source and its competence with respect to specific domains: both these aspects influence the assessment of the information, and also determine a feedback on the trustworthiness degree of its source. We provide a framework to describe the combined effects of competence and sincerity on the perceived quality of information. We focus on the feedback dynamics from information quality to source evaluation, highlighting the role that uncertainty reduction and social comparison play in determining the amount and the distribution of feedback

A granular approach to source trustworthiness for negative trust assessment

The problem of determining what information to trust is crucial in many contexts that admit uncertainty and polarization. In this paper, we propose a method to systematically reason on the trustworthiness of sources. While not aiming at establishing their veracity, the metho

Meta-Information and Argumentation in Multi-Agent Systems

In this work we compile our research regarding meta-information in multi-agent systems. In particular, we describe some agents profiles represent- ing different attitudes which describe how agents consider meta-information in their decisions-making and reasoning processes. Furthermore, we describe how we have combined different meta-information available in multi-agent systems with an argumentation-based reasoning mechanism. In our approach, agents are able to decide more conflicts between information/arguments, given that they are able to use different meta-information (often combined) to decide between such conflicting information. Our framework for meta-information in multi- agent systems was implemented based on a modular architecture, thus other meta-information can be added, as well as different meta-information can be combined in order to create new agents profiles. Therefore, in our approach, different agents profiles can be instantiated for different application domains, allowing flexibility in the choice of how agents will deal with conflicting infor- mation in those particular domains

Knowledge sharing in the health scenario

The understanding of certain data often requires the collection of similar data from different places to be analysed and interpreted. Interoperability standards and ontologies, are facilitating data interchange around the world. However, beyond the existing networks and advances for data transfer, data sharing protocols to support multilateral agreements are useful to exploit the knowledge of distributed Data Warehouses. The access to a certain data set in a federated Data Warehouse may be constrained by the requirement to deliver another specific data set. When bilateral agreements between two nodes of a network are not enough to solve the constraints for accessing to a certain data set, multilateral agreements for data exchange are needed. We present the implementation of a Multi-Agent System for multilateral exchange agreements of clinical data, and evaluate how those multilateral agreements increase the percentage of data collected by a single node from the total amount of data available in the network. Different strategies to reduce the number of messages needed to achieve an agreement are also considered. The results show that with this collaborative sharing scenario the percentage of data collected dramaticaly improve from bilateral agreements to multilateral ones, up to reach almost all data available in the network

An efficient and versatile approach to trust and reputation using hierarchical Bayesian modelling

In many dynamic open systems, autonomous agents must interact with one another to achieve their goals. Such agents may be self-interested and, when trusted to perform an action, may betray that trust by not performing the action as required. Due to the scale and dynamism of these systems, agents will often need to interact with other agents with which they have little or no past experience. Each agent must therefore be capable of assessing and identifying reliable interaction partners, even if it has no personal experience with them. To this end, we present HABIT, a Hierarchical And Bayesian Inferred Trust model for assessing how much an agent should trust its peers based on direct and third party information. This model is robust in environments in which third party information is malicious, noisy, or otherwise inaccurate. Although existing approaches claim to achieve this, most rely on heuristics with little theoretical foundation. In contrast, HABIT is based exclusively on principled statistical techniques: it can cope with multiple discrete or continuous aspects of trustee behaviour; it does not restrict agents to using a single shared representation of behaviour; it can improve assessment by using any observed correlation between the behaviour of similar trustees or information sources; and it provides a pragmatic solution to the whitewasher problem (in which unreliable agents assume a new identity to avoid bad reputation). In this paper, we describe the theoretical aspects of HABIT, and present experimental results that demonstrate its ability to predict agent behaviour in both a simulated environment, and one based on data from a real-world webserver domain. In particular, these experiments show that HABIT can predict trustee performance based on multiple representations of behaviour, and is up to twice as accurate as BLADE, an existing state-of-the-art trust model that is both statistically principled and has been previously shown to outperform a number of other probabilistic trust models

Online Handbook of Argumentation for AI: Volume 1

This volume contains revised versions of the papers selected for the first volume of the Online Handbook of Argumentation for AI (OHAAI). Previously, formal theories of argument and argument interaction have been proposed and studied, and this has led to the more recent study of computational models of argument. Argumentation, as a field within artificial intelligence (AI), is highly relevant for researchers interested in symbolic representations of knowledge and defeasible reasoning. The purpose of this handbook is to provide an open access and curated anthology for the argumentation research community. OHAAI is designed to serve as a research hub to keep track of the latest and upcoming PhD-driven research on the theory and application of argumentation in all areas related to AI.Comment: editor: Federico Castagna and Francesca Mosca and Jack Mumford and Stefan Sarkadi and Andreas Xydi