Fuzzy argumentation for trust

In an open Multi-Agent System, the goals of agents acting on behalf of their owners often conflict with each other. Therefore, a personal agent protecting the interest of a single user cannot always rely on them. Consequently, such a personal agent needs to be able to reason about trusting (information or services provided by) other agents. Existing algorithms that perform such reasoning mainly focus on the immediate utility of a trusting decision, but do not provide an explanation of their actions to the user. This may hinder the acceptance of agent-based technologies in sensitive applications where users need to rely on their personal agents. Against this background, we propose a new approach to trust based on argumentation that aims to expose the rationale behind such trusting decisions. Our solution features a separation of opponent modeling and decision making. It uses possibilistic logic to model behavior of opponents, and we propose an extension of the argumentation framework by Amgoud and Prade to use the fuzzy rules within these models for well-supported decisions

Inconceivable! Possibilistic thinking and the sociocognitive underpinnings of entrepreneurial responses to grand challenges

Due to the radical uncertainty associated with grand challenges, prior studies have emphasized the need for robust action, which preserves future options while taking existing means and institutional constraints seriously. In this conversation on entrepreneurial futures and possibilities, we suggest that for such approaches to avoid merely reproducing or incrementally improving upon existing ideas and institutions, they must be underpinned by a set of cognitive practices that encourage the systematic interrogation of existing assumptions, the surfacing of bold systemic interventions, and efforts to discourage early dismissals of such interventions based on historically grounded feasibility judgments. To encapsulate these cognitive practices, we introduce the concept of possibilistic thinking, noting how such thinking significantly reorients entrepreneurs’ attention and reasoning processes. We conclude by discussing the tensions associated with possibilistic thinking as well as opportunities for further research