Information-based argumentation

Information-based argumentation aims to model the partner's reasoning apparatus to the extent that an agent can work with it to achieve outcomes that are mutually satisfactory and lay the foundation for continued interaction and perhaps lasting business relationships. Information-based agents take observations at face value, qualify them with a belief probability and build models solely on the basis of messages received. Using augmentative dialogue that describes what is good or bad about proposals, these agents observe such statements and aim to model the way their partners react, and then to generate dialogue that works in harmony with their partner's reasoning. © 2009 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg

An argumentation system that builds trusted trading partnerships

University of Technology, Sydney. Faculty of Engineering and Information Technology.In e-Commerce, a buying process typically begins with browsing the available products or services, and then selecting the ones that satisfy a given need. The next phase is negotiation to reach an agreement. If an agreement is signed between two parties, they enter into the enactment phase including payment and delivery. After that, they evaluate how well the products or services satisfy their needs. One of the reasons for dissatisfaction is that a trading agent does not know its opponent agent's needs, contract acceptance criteria, or behaviour during their interactions. This dissertation is concerned with the problems and challenges of repeatedly conducted trading activities in e-Commerce applications. Argumentation is a mode of interaction between agents that enables them to exchange information within messages in the form of arguments to explain their current position and future plans with the intention of increasing the chance of success in the negotiation. How an agent conducts all phases of a buying process through argumentation is an important research query. It becomes difficult to solve this query if an agent has to repeatedly conduct trading activities with its opponent agents. This work describes a novel solution to how an agent builds trusted trading partnerships with its opponent agents. The requirements of all phases of a buying process are specified by five models: the needs model, the opponent agent selection model, the communication model, the agreement model, and the relationship model. The relationship aware argumentation framework is then proposed. It integrates how the trading agents analyze their interaction history, exchanged information, and any promises made. An agent architecture is then developed that extends the idea of information based agency. It measures the strength of business relationships and predicts behavioural parameters from the history of interactions. This dissertation establishes the thesis statement, "Modelling the strength of relationships between agents and predicting the behaviour of trading partner agents in a multi agent argumentation system enables agents to build trusted trading partnerships". A prototype simulation environment has been developed to conduct the experiments and to validate the thesis statement. The simulated arrival rate obtained by the proposed model is lower than that of an existing model, e.g., the Trust and Honour model. The prototype argumentation system demonstrated a proof of concept. The prototype will be further developed before applying the proposed argumentation system in commercial applications

On the integration of trust with negotiation, argumentation and semantics

Agreement Technologies are needed for autonomous agents to come to mutually acceptable agreements, typically on behalf of humans. These technologies include trust computing, negotiation, argumentation and semantic alignment. In this paper, we identify a number of open questions regarding the integration of computational models and tools for trust computing with negotiation, argumentation and semantic alignment. We consider these questions in general and in the context of applications in open, distributed settings such as the grid and cloud computing. © 2013 Cambridge University Press.This work was partially supported by the Agreement Technology COST action (IC0801). The authors would like to thank for helpful discussions and comments all participants in the panel on >Trust, Argumentation and Semantics> on 16 December 2009, Agia Napa, CyprusPeer Reviewe

Social Media Polarization and the Ministry of Reconciliation

Online communication is becoming increasingly divisive. This dissertation argues that the best way for individuals to decrease social media polarization is for people to engage in the ministry of reconciliation in their social media interactions. Section One describes how social media polarizes because the medium promotes networked individualism, exaggerates dehumanizing “discarnate” communication and numbs humanity’s ability to form meaningful relationships. The left-brain focused argumentation, writing-centered communication and depersonalized nature of online interactions increase a lack of empathy in social media users and add to the polarizing chaos evident in many social media conflicts. Section Two examines how individuals have unsuccessfully tried to address the increased polarization of social media through employing non-relational, information-based solutions; engaging in increased argumentative partisan behaviors; embracing ideological segmentation and adopting conflict avoidance and disengagement practices. Section Three proposes how to facilitate social media reconciliation through (1) developing a Christ-centered theology of reconciliation; (2) advocating online reconciliation that addresses the unique challenges of the medium of social media and (3) utilizing Brenda Salter McNeil’s Roadmap to Reconciliation as a guide to internet conflict resolution. Section Four describes the artifact, a non-fiction book entitled, Angry, Polarizing People: Communicating Truth in the Social Media Age, that will help readers communicate in a way that promotes reconciliation. Section Five articulates the artifact’s specifications

From personal experience to design : externalizing the homeowner's needs assessment process

Thesis (S.M.)--Massachusetts Institute of Technology, School of Architecture and Planning, Program in Media Arts and Sciences, 2003.Includes bibliographical references (p. 211-215).This electronic version was submitted by the student author. The certified thesis is available in the Institute Archives and Special Collections.Advances in building and computational technologies, coupled with a reorganized and integrated system of residential design, may make custom homes a possibility for a larger segment of the population in the years to come. While tools and materials that embody building and design expertise are necessary for making such a system workable, how the homeowner is supported and represented will determine whether the resulting houses are not just custom, but personally meaningful. The particular focus of this work is on how to externalize the layperson's task of establishing needs and setting goals as an essential stage within a sophisticated design process. The work is informed by interviews with homeowners and a participant study of constructive and interpretative exercises. One such exercise asked participants to serve as investigators into their own practices through use of simple sensors placed in the home environment. The work concludes with a proposal for tools and approaches to collect rich requirement data and prime users for design decisions by helping them to identify their perspective, needs, and goals. KEYWORDS: home design, mass customization, participatory design, constructionism, reflective practice, adult learning, architectural program, HCI.by Jennifer Suzanne Beaudin.S.M