Modeling multiagent deliberation from an abstract standpoint
- Autores
- Stankevicius, Alejandro G.
- Año de publicación
- 2001
- Idioma
- inglés
- Tipo de recurso
- documento de conferencia
- Estado
- versión publicada
- Descripción
- Simply put, a multiagent system can be understood as a collection of autonomous agents able to accomplish as a whole goals beyond the capabilities of any of its members. The traditional example depicts a heavy armchair that can be easily lifted by coordinating the effort of a group of persons despite that none of them would have been able to pick it up alone. Thus, one might argue that precisely the agent interaction is boosting the system performance. Since this interaction comes in several flavors, the literature has already explored notions such as agent coordination, cooperation, and collaboration in the context of multiagent systems. This extended abstract outlines our own understanding on this matter, summarizing the evolution of an abstract model for the particular kind of agent interaction known as deliberation. A group of agents deliberate whenever they need to come to a mutually accepted position about some issue. This interaction among agents has drawn our attention given its ubiquity: we believe that complex interactions such as coordination or cooperation might be attained as a result of accruing one or more deliberations. Our proposal is inspired after the novel trend of reinterpreting agent interaction as if it were the result of an argumentation process. For instance, several authors [2,3,5,13,14] have recently considered recasting the main aspects of multiagent negotiation in terms of defeasible argumentation. We follow a like approach in developing our model after a set of dialectical concepts borrowed from that same area. Our approach also strives for generality, mainly after Dung's ample success with his notion of argumentative framework due to its abstract nature. In consequence, we too have decided to pursue an abstract model.
Eje: Inteligencia Artificial Distribuida, Aspectos Teóricos de la Inteligencia Artificial y Teoría de la Computación
Red de Universidades con Carreras en Informática (RedUNCI) - Materia
-
Ciencias Informáticas
Theory of Computation
Modeling Multiagent Deliberation
ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE
Abstract Standpoint
Distributed Systems - Nivel de accesibilidad
- acceso abierto
- Condiciones de uso
- http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/2.5/ar/
- Repositorio
- Institución
- Universidad Nacional de La Plata
- OAI Identificador
- oai:sedici.unlp.edu.ar:10915/21640
Ver los metadatos del registro completo
id |
SEDICI_b43ddde274e79bc3053bd93c878a2d87 |
---|---|
oai_identifier_str |
oai:sedici.unlp.edu.ar:10915/21640 |
network_acronym_str |
SEDICI |
repository_id_str |
1329 |
network_name_str |
SEDICI (UNLP) |
spelling |
Modeling multiagent deliberation from an abstract standpointStankevicius, Alejandro G.Ciencias InformáticasTheory of ComputationModeling Multiagent DeliberationARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCEAbstract StandpointDistributed SystemsSimply put, a multiagent system can be understood as a collection of autonomous agents able to accomplish as a whole goals beyond the capabilities of any of its members. The traditional example depicts a heavy armchair that can be easily lifted by coordinating the effort of a group of persons despite that none of them would have been able to pick it up alone. Thus, one might argue that precisely the agent interaction is boosting the system performance. Since this interaction comes in several flavors, the literature has already explored notions such as agent coordination, cooperation, and collaboration in the context of multiagent systems. This extended abstract outlines our own understanding on this matter, summarizing the evolution of an abstract model for the particular kind of agent interaction known as deliberation. A group of agents deliberate whenever they need to come to a mutually accepted position about some issue. This interaction among agents has drawn our attention given its ubiquity: we believe that complex interactions such as coordination or cooperation might be attained as a result of accruing one or more deliberations. Our proposal is inspired after the novel trend of reinterpreting agent interaction as if it were the result of an argumentation process. For instance, several authors [2,3,5,13,14] have recently considered recasting the main aspects of multiagent negotiation in terms of defeasible argumentation. We follow a like approach in developing our model after a set of dialectical concepts borrowed from that same area. Our approach also strives for generality, mainly after Dung's ample success with his notion of argumentative framework due to its abstract nature. In consequence, we too have decided to pursue an abstract model.Eje: Inteligencia Artificial Distribuida, Aspectos Teóricos de la Inteligencia Artificial y Teoría de la ComputaciónRed de Universidades con Carreras en Informática (RedUNCI)2001-05info:eu-repo/semantics/conferenceObjectinfo:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersionObjeto de conferenciahttp://purl.org/coar/resource_type/c_5794info:ar-repo/semantics/documentoDeConferenciaapplication/pdfhttp://sedici.unlp.edu.ar/handle/10915/21640enginfo:eu-repo/semantics/openAccesshttp://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/2.5/ar/Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 2.5 Argentina (CC BY-NC-SA 2.5)reponame:SEDICI (UNLP)instname:Universidad Nacional de La Platainstacron:UNLP2025-10-15T10:47:19Zoai:sedici.unlp.edu.ar:10915/21640Institucionalhttp://sedici.unlp.edu.ar/Universidad públicaNo correspondehttp://sedici.unlp.edu.ar/oai/snrdalira@sedici.unlp.edu.arArgentinaNo correspondeNo correspondeNo correspondeopendoar:13292025-10-15 10:47:20.147SEDICI (UNLP) - Universidad Nacional de La Platafalse |
dc.title.none.fl_str_mv |
Modeling multiagent deliberation from an abstract standpoint |
title |
Modeling multiagent deliberation from an abstract standpoint |
spellingShingle |
Modeling multiagent deliberation from an abstract standpoint Stankevicius, Alejandro G. Ciencias Informáticas Theory of Computation Modeling Multiagent Deliberation ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE Abstract Standpoint Distributed Systems |
title_short |
Modeling multiagent deliberation from an abstract standpoint |
title_full |
Modeling multiagent deliberation from an abstract standpoint |
title_fullStr |
Modeling multiagent deliberation from an abstract standpoint |
title_full_unstemmed |
Modeling multiagent deliberation from an abstract standpoint |
title_sort |
Modeling multiagent deliberation from an abstract standpoint |
dc.creator.none.fl_str_mv |
Stankevicius, Alejandro G. |
author |
Stankevicius, Alejandro G. |
author_facet |
Stankevicius, Alejandro G. |
author_role |
author |
dc.subject.none.fl_str_mv |
Ciencias Informáticas Theory of Computation Modeling Multiagent Deliberation ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE Abstract Standpoint Distributed Systems |
topic |
Ciencias Informáticas Theory of Computation Modeling Multiagent Deliberation ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE Abstract Standpoint Distributed Systems |
dc.description.none.fl_txt_mv |
Simply put, a multiagent system can be understood as a collection of autonomous agents able to accomplish as a whole goals beyond the capabilities of any of its members. The traditional example depicts a heavy armchair that can be easily lifted by coordinating the effort of a group of persons despite that none of them would have been able to pick it up alone. Thus, one might argue that precisely the agent interaction is boosting the system performance. Since this interaction comes in several flavors, the literature has already explored notions such as agent coordination, cooperation, and collaboration in the context of multiagent systems. This extended abstract outlines our own understanding on this matter, summarizing the evolution of an abstract model for the particular kind of agent interaction known as deliberation. A group of agents deliberate whenever they need to come to a mutually accepted position about some issue. This interaction among agents has drawn our attention given its ubiquity: we believe that complex interactions such as coordination or cooperation might be attained as a result of accruing one or more deliberations. Our proposal is inspired after the novel trend of reinterpreting agent interaction as if it were the result of an argumentation process. For instance, several authors [2,3,5,13,14] have recently considered recasting the main aspects of multiagent negotiation in terms of defeasible argumentation. We follow a like approach in developing our model after a set of dialectical concepts borrowed from that same area. Our approach also strives for generality, mainly after Dung's ample success with his notion of argumentative framework due to its abstract nature. In consequence, we too have decided to pursue an abstract model. Eje: Inteligencia Artificial Distribuida, Aspectos Teóricos de la Inteligencia Artificial y Teoría de la Computación Red de Universidades con Carreras en Informática (RedUNCI) |
description |
Simply put, a multiagent system can be understood as a collection of autonomous agents able to accomplish as a whole goals beyond the capabilities of any of its members. The traditional example depicts a heavy armchair that can be easily lifted by coordinating the effort of a group of persons despite that none of them would have been able to pick it up alone. Thus, one might argue that precisely the agent interaction is boosting the system performance. Since this interaction comes in several flavors, the literature has already explored notions such as agent coordination, cooperation, and collaboration in the context of multiagent systems. This extended abstract outlines our own understanding on this matter, summarizing the evolution of an abstract model for the particular kind of agent interaction known as deliberation. A group of agents deliberate whenever they need to come to a mutually accepted position about some issue. This interaction among agents has drawn our attention given its ubiquity: we believe that complex interactions such as coordination or cooperation might be attained as a result of accruing one or more deliberations. Our proposal is inspired after the novel trend of reinterpreting agent interaction as if it were the result of an argumentation process. For instance, several authors [2,3,5,13,14] have recently considered recasting the main aspects of multiagent negotiation in terms of defeasible argumentation. We follow a like approach in developing our model after a set of dialectical concepts borrowed from that same area. Our approach also strives for generality, mainly after Dung's ample success with his notion of argumentative framework due to its abstract nature. In consequence, we too have decided to pursue an abstract model. |
publishDate |
2001 |
dc.date.none.fl_str_mv |
2001-05 |
dc.type.none.fl_str_mv |
info:eu-repo/semantics/conferenceObject info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion Objeto de conferencia http://purl.org/coar/resource_type/c_5794 info:ar-repo/semantics/documentoDeConferencia |
format |
conferenceObject |
status_str |
publishedVersion |
dc.identifier.none.fl_str_mv |
http://sedici.unlp.edu.ar/handle/10915/21640 |
url |
http://sedici.unlp.edu.ar/handle/10915/21640 |
dc.language.none.fl_str_mv |
eng |
language |
eng |
dc.rights.none.fl_str_mv |
info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/2.5/ar/ Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 2.5 Argentina (CC BY-NC-SA 2.5) |
eu_rights_str_mv |
openAccess |
rights_invalid_str_mv |
http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/2.5/ar/ Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 2.5 Argentina (CC BY-NC-SA 2.5) |
dc.format.none.fl_str_mv |
application/pdf |
dc.source.none.fl_str_mv |
reponame:SEDICI (UNLP) instname:Universidad Nacional de La Plata instacron:UNLP |
reponame_str |
SEDICI (UNLP) |
collection |
SEDICI (UNLP) |
instname_str |
Universidad Nacional de La Plata |
instacron_str |
UNLP |
institution |
UNLP |
repository.name.fl_str_mv |
SEDICI (UNLP) - Universidad Nacional de La Plata |
repository.mail.fl_str_mv |
alira@sedici.unlp.edu.ar |
_version_ |
1846063899220115456 |
score |
13.22299 |