Argument-based Belief in Topological Structures

This paper combines two studies: a topological semantics for epistemic notions and abstract argumentation theory. In our combined setting, we use a topological semantics to represent the structure of an agent's collection of evidence, and we use argumentation theory to single out the relevant sets of evidence through which a notion of beliefs grounded on arguments is defined. We discuss the formal properties of this newly defined notion, providing also a formal language with a matching modality together with a sound and complete axiom system for it. Despite the fact that our agent can combine her evidence in a 'rational' way (captured via the topological structure), argument-based beliefs are not closed under conjunction. This illustrates the difference between an agent's reasoning abilities (i.e. the way she is able to combine her available evidence) and the closure properties of her beliefs. We use this point to argue for why the failure of closure under conjunction of belief should not bear the burden of the failure of rationality.Comment: In Proceedings TARK 2017, arXiv:1707.0825

Value-based argumentation frameworks as neural-symbolic learning systems

While neural networks have been successfully used in a number of machine learning applications, logical languages have been the standard for the representation of argumentative reasoning. In this paper, we establish a relationship between neural networks and argumentation networks, combining reasoning and learning in the same argumentation framework. We do so by presenting a new neural argumentation algorithm, responsible for translating argumentation networks into standard neural networks. We then show a correspondence between the two networks. The algorithm works not only for acyclic argumentation networks, but also for circular networks, and it enables the accrual of arguments through learning as well as the parallel computation of arguments

Rewriting Modernity

This article rereads Paul Virilio, drawing on the distinctionbetween topography and topology to argue a case for Virilio as a rewriter of modernity. Invoking Jean-François Lyotard’s notion of rewriting modernity as an unbroken process of accumulation founded on affective life in “Re-writing Modernity” and “Argumentation and Presentation: The Foundation Crisis,” it enlists topology as a horizontal spatial structure that enables us to rethink space, time,and modernity outside the limits of the “squared horizon,” where the“squared horizon” is viewed as a spatial and textual metaphor for framing perspectives on the past, present, and future. The analysis deconstructs the topography of the “squared horizon” as a relationality in an unfolding continuum, where spaces exist ontologically and where the immaterial forces of the dromospheric and the atmospheric generate a relational and historical connectedness

Argument-based agreements in agent societies

In this paper, we present an abstract argumentation framework for the support of agreement processes in agent societies. It takes into account arguments, attacks among them, and the social context of the agents that put forward arguments. Then, we de¿ne the semantics of the framework, providing a mechanism to evaluate arguments in view of other arguments posed in the argumentation process. We also provide a translation of the framework into a neural network that computes the set of acceptable arguments and can be tuned to give more or less importance to argument attacks. Finally, the framework is illustrated with an example in a real domain of a water-rights transfer market. & 2011 Elsevier B.V. All rights reservedThis work is supported by the Spanish government Grants CONSOLIDER INGENIO 2010 CSD2007-00022, TIN2008-04446 and TIN2009-13839-C03-01 and by the GVA project PROMETEO 2008/051.Heras Barberá, SM.; Botti Navarro, VJ.; Julian Inglada, VJ. (2012). Argument-based agreements in agent societies. Neurocomputing. 75(1):156-162. doi:10.1016/j.neucom.2011.02.022S15616275

Proceedings ICPW'07: 2nd International Conference on the Pragmatic Web, 22-23 Oct. 2007, Tilburg: NL

Proceedings ICPW'07: 2nd International Conference on the Pragmatic Web, 22-23 Oct. 2007, Tilburg: N

Thomas S. Schelling: game theory and indirect communication

In their recent work Thomas S. Schelling (2007, 2010), reiterating original arguments about game theory and its applications to social sciences. In particular, game theory helps to explore situations in which agents make decisions interdependent (strategic communication). Schelling's originality is to extend economic theory to social sciences. When a player can anticipate the options and influence the decisions of others. The strategy, indirect communication plays a crucial role. To illustrate, we investigate how to perform the payoff matrix in cases of bribery and threatSocial Science, Schelling, game theory, strategic communications, bribes, threats

Social Influence and the Generation of Joint Mental Attitudes in Multi-agent Systems

This work examines the social structural and cognitive foundations of joint mental attitudes in complexly differentated multi-agent systems, and incorporates insights from a variety of disciplines, including mainstream Distributed Artificial Intelligence, sociology, administrative science, social psychology, and organisational perspectives. At the heart of this work lies the understanding of the on-going processes by which socially and cognitively differentiated agents come to be socially and cognitively integrated. Here we claim that such understanding rests on the consideration of the nature of the influence processes that affect socialisation intensity. To this end, we provide a logic-based computational model of social influence and we undertake a set of virtual experiments to investigate whether and to what extent this process, when it is played out in a system of negotiating agents, results in a modification of the agents' mental attitudes and impacts on negotiation performance