Paretian argumentation frameworks for Pareto optimal arguments

Argument-based reasoning offers promising interaction and computation mechanisms for multi-agent negotiation and deliberation. Arguments in this context are typically statements of beliefs or actions related to agents' subjective values, preferences and so on. Consequences of such arguments can and should be evaluated using various criteria, and therefore it is desirable that semantics supports these criteria as principles for accepting arguments. This article gives an instance of Dung's abstract argumentation framework to deal with Pareto optimality, i.e. a fundamental criterion for social welfare. We show that the instance allows Dung's acceptability semantics to interpret Pareto optimal arguments, without loss of generality. We discuss the prospects of justified Pareto optimal arguments and Pareto optimal extensions

Logical Representation of Legal Knowledge

JAIST 21世紀COEシンポジウム2005「検証進化可能電子社会」 = JAIST 21st Century COE Symposium 2005 “Verifiable and Evolvable e-Society”, 開催：2005年3月10日～11日, 開催場所：石川ハイテク交流センターTechnical session 2 <Legal Reasoning