Judgement aggregation in multi-agent argumentation

Autores
Awad, Edmond; Booth, Richard; Tohmé, Fernando Abel; Rahwan, Iyad
Año de publicación
2017
Idioma
inglés
Tipo de recurso
artículo
Estado
versión publicada
Descripción
Given a set of conflicting arguments, there can exist multiple plausible opinions about which arguments should be accepted, rejected or deemed undecided. We study the problem of how multiple such judgements can be aggregated. We define the problem by adapting various classical social-choice-theoretic properties for the argumentation domain. We show that while argument-wise plurality voting satisfies many properties, it fails to guarantee the collective rationality of the outcome. We then present more general results, proving multiple impossibility results on the existence of any good aggregation operator. After characterizing the sufficient and necessary conditions for satisfying collective rationality, we study whether restricting the domain of argument-wise plurality voting to classical semantics allows us to escape the impossibility result. We close by mentioning a couple of graph-theoretical restrictions under which the argument-wise plurality rule does produce collectively rational outcomes. In addition to identifying fundamental barriers to collective argument evaluation, our results contribute to research at the intersection of the argumentation and computational social choice fields.
Fil: Awad, Edmond. Khalifa University Of Science And Technology; Emiratos Arabes Unidos
Fil: Booth, Richard. Mahasarakham University; Tailandia
Fil: Tohmé, Fernando Abel. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas. Centro Científico Tecnológico Conicet - Bahía Blanca; Argentina. Universidad Nacional del Sur; Argentina
Fil: Rahwan, Iyad. Massachusetts Institute of Technology; Estados Unidos. Khalifa University Of Science And Technology; Emiratos Arabes Unidos
Materia
Agents
Argumentation
Preferences
Social Choice
Nivel de accesibilidad
acceso abierto
Condiciones de uso
https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/2.5/ar/
Repositorio
CONICET Digital (CONICET)
Institución
Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas
OAI Identificador
oai:ri.conicet.gov.ar:11336/62080

id CONICETDig_c596ec4ee5d79f187b71e1ca9d88832c
oai_identifier_str oai:ri.conicet.gov.ar:11336/62080
network_acronym_str CONICETDig
repository_id_str 3498
network_name_str CONICET Digital (CONICET)
spelling Judgement aggregation in multi-agent argumentationAwad, EdmondBooth, RichardTohmé, Fernando AbelRahwan, IyadAgentsArgumentationPreferencesSocial Choicehttps://purl.org/becyt/ford/1.2https://purl.org/becyt/ford/1Given a set of conflicting arguments, there can exist multiple plausible opinions about which arguments should be accepted, rejected or deemed undecided. We study the problem of how multiple such judgements can be aggregated. We define the problem by adapting various classical social-choice-theoretic properties for the argumentation domain. We show that while argument-wise plurality voting satisfies many properties, it fails to guarantee the collective rationality of the outcome. We then present more general results, proving multiple impossibility results on the existence of any good aggregation operator. After characterizing the sufficient and necessary conditions for satisfying collective rationality, we study whether restricting the domain of argument-wise plurality voting to classical semantics allows us to escape the impossibility result. We close by mentioning a couple of graph-theoretical restrictions under which the argument-wise plurality rule does produce collectively rational outcomes. In addition to identifying fundamental barriers to collective argument evaluation, our results contribute to research at the intersection of the argumentation and computational social choice fields.Fil: Awad, Edmond. Khalifa University Of Science And Technology; Emiratos Arabes UnidosFil: Booth, Richard. Mahasarakham University; TailandiaFil: Tohmé, Fernando Abel. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas. Centro Científico Tecnológico Conicet - Bahía Blanca; Argentina. Universidad Nacional del Sur; ArgentinaFil: Rahwan, Iyad. Massachusetts Institute of Technology; Estados Unidos. Khalifa University Of Science And Technology; Emiratos Arabes UnidosOxford University Press2017-02info:eu-repo/semantics/articleinfo:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersionhttp://purl.org/coar/resource_type/c_6501info:ar-repo/semantics/articuloapplication/pdfapplication/pdfhttp://hdl.handle.net/11336/62080Awad, Edmond; Booth, Richard; Tohmé, Fernando Abel; Rahwan, Iyad; Judgement aggregation in multi-agent argumentation; Oxford University Press; Journal of Logic and Computation; 27; 1; 2-2017; 227-2590955-792XCONICET DigitalCONICETenginfo:eu-repo/semantics/altIdentifier/doi/10.1093/logcom/exv055info:eu-repo/semantics/altIdentifier/url/https://academic.oup.com/logcom/article-abstract/27/1/227/2917830?redirectedFrom=fulltextinfo:eu-repo/semantics/openAccesshttps://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/2.5/ar/reponame:CONICET Digital (CONICET)instname:Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas2025-09-29T09:36:30Zoai:ri.conicet.gov.ar:11336/62080instacron:CONICETInstitucionalhttp://ri.conicet.gov.ar/Organismo científico-tecnológicoNo correspondehttp://ri.conicet.gov.ar/oai/requestdasensio@conicet.gov.ar; lcarlino@conicet.gov.arArgentinaNo correspondeNo correspondeNo correspondeopendoar:34982025-09-29 09:36:31.262CONICET Digital (CONICET) - Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicasfalse
dc.title.none.fl_str_mv Judgement aggregation in multi-agent argumentation
title Judgement aggregation in multi-agent argumentation
spellingShingle Judgement aggregation in multi-agent argumentation
Awad, Edmond
Agents
Argumentation
Preferences
Social Choice
title_short Judgement aggregation in multi-agent argumentation
title_full Judgement aggregation in multi-agent argumentation
title_fullStr Judgement aggregation in multi-agent argumentation
title_full_unstemmed Judgement aggregation in multi-agent argumentation
title_sort Judgement aggregation in multi-agent argumentation
dc.creator.none.fl_str_mv Awad, Edmond
Booth, Richard
Tohmé, Fernando Abel
Rahwan, Iyad
author Awad, Edmond
author_facet Awad, Edmond
Booth, Richard
Tohmé, Fernando Abel
Rahwan, Iyad
author_role author
author2 Booth, Richard
Tohmé, Fernando Abel
Rahwan, Iyad
author2_role author
author
author
dc.subject.none.fl_str_mv Agents
Argumentation
Preferences
Social Choice
topic Agents
Argumentation
Preferences
Social Choice
purl_subject.fl_str_mv https://purl.org/becyt/ford/1.2
https://purl.org/becyt/ford/1
dc.description.none.fl_txt_mv Given a set of conflicting arguments, there can exist multiple plausible opinions about which arguments should be accepted, rejected or deemed undecided. We study the problem of how multiple such judgements can be aggregated. We define the problem by adapting various classical social-choice-theoretic properties for the argumentation domain. We show that while argument-wise plurality voting satisfies many properties, it fails to guarantee the collective rationality of the outcome. We then present more general results, proving multiple impossibility results on the existence of any good aggregation operator. After characterizing the sufficient and necessary conditions for satisfying collective rationality, we study whether restricting the domain of argument-wise plurality voting to classical semantics allows us to escape the impossibility result. We close by mentioning a couple of graph-theoretical restrictions under which the argument-wise plurality rule does produce collectively rational outcomes. In addition to identifying fundamental barriers to collective argument evaluation, our results contribute to research at the intersection of the argumentation and computational social choice fields.
Fil: Awad, Edmond. Khalifa University Of Science And Technology; Emiratos Arabes Unidos
Fil: Booth, Richard. Mahasarakham University; Tailandia
Fil: Tohmé, Fernando Abel. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas. Centro Científico Tecnológico Conicet - Bahía Blanca; Argentina. Universidad Nacional del Sur; Argentina
Fil: Rahwan, Iyad. Massachusetts Institute of Technology; Estados Unidos. Khalifa University Of Science And Technology; Emiratos Arabes Unidos
description Given a set of conflicting arguments, there can exist multiple plausible opinions about which arguments should be accepted, rejected or deemed undecided. We study the problem of how multiple such judgements can be aggregated. We define the problem by adapting various classical social-choice-theoretic properties for the argumentation domain. We show that while argument-wise plurality voting satisfies many properties, it fails to guarantee the collective rationality of the outcome. We then present more general results, proving multiple impossibility results on the existence of any good aggregation operator. After characterizing the sufficient and necessary conditions for satisfying collective rationality, we study whether restricting the domain of argument-wise plurality voting to classical semantics allows us to escape the impossibility result. We close by mentioning a couple of graph-theoretical restrictions under which the argument-wise plurality rule does produce collectively rational outcomes. In addition to identifying fundamental barriers to collective argument evaluation, our results contribute to research at the intersection of the argumentation and computational social choice fields.
publishDate 2017
dc.date.none.fl_str_mv 2017-02
dc.type.none.fl_str_mv info:eu-repo/semantics/article
info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion
http://purl.org/coar/resource_type/c_6501
info:ar-repo/semantics/articulo
format article
status_str publishedVersion
dc.identifier.none.fl_str_mv http://hdl.handle.net/11336/62080
Awad, Edmond; Booth, Richard; Tohmé, Fernando Abel; Rahwan, Iyad; Judgement aggregation in multi-agent argumentation; Oxford University Press; Journal of Logic and Computation; 27; 1; 2-2017; 227-259
0955-792X
CONICET Digital
CONICET
url http://hdl.handle.net/11336/62080
identifier_str_mv Awad, Edmond; Booth, Richard; Tohmé, Fernando Abel; Rahwan, Iyad; Judgement aggregation in multi-agent argumentation; Oxford University Press; Journal of Logic and Computation; 27; 1; 2-2017; 227-259
0955-792X
CONICET Digital
CONICET
dc.language.none.fl_str_mv eng
language eng
dc.relation.none.fl_str_mv info:eu-repo/semantics/altIdentifier/doi/10.1093/logcom/exv055
info:eu-repo/semantics/altIdentifier/url/https://academic.oup.com/logcom/article-abstract/27/1/227/2917830?redirectedFrom=fulltext
dc.rights.none.fl_str_mv info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess
https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/2.5/ar/
eu_rights_str_mv openAccess
rights_invalid_str_mv https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/2.5/ar/
dc.format.none.fl_str_mv application/pdf
application/pdf
dc.publisher.none.fl_str_mv Oxford University Press
publisher.none.fl_str_mv Oxford University Press
dc.source.none.fl_str_mv reponame:CONICET Digital (CONICET)
instname:Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas
reponame_str CONICET Digital (CONICET)
collection CONICET Digital (CONICET)
instname_str Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas
repository.name.fl_str_mv CONICET Digital (CONICET) - Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas
repository.mail.fl_str_mv dasensio@conicet.gov.ar; lcarlino@conicet.gov.ar
_version_ 1844613146342326272
score 13.070432