The paper introduces the notion of an epistemic argumentation framework (EAF) as a means to integrate the beliefs of a reasoner with argumentation. Intuitively, an EAF encodes the beliefs of an agent who reasons about arguments. Formally, an EAF is a pair of an argumentation framework and an epistemic constraint. The semantics of the EAF is defined by the notion of an -epistemic labelling set, where is complete, stable, grounded, or preferred, which is a set of -labellings that collectively satisfies the epistemic constraint of the EAF. The paper shows how EAF can represent different views of reasoners on the same argumentation framework. It also includes representing preferences in EAF and multi-agent argumentation. Finally, the paper discusses the complexity of the problem of determining whether or not an -epistemic labelling set exists.
more »
« less
Epistemic Argumentation Framework: Theory and Computation
The paper introduces the notion of an epistemic argumentation framework (EAF) as a means to integrate the beliefs of a reasoner with argumentation. Intuitively, an EAF encodes the beliefs of an agent who reasons about arguments. Formally, an EAF is a pair of an argumentation framework and an epistemic constraint. The semantics of the EAF is defined by the notion of an ω-epistemic labelling set, where ω is complete, stable, grounded, or preferred, which is a set of ω-labellings that collectively satisfies the epistemic constraint of the EAF. The paper shows how EAF can represent different views of reasoners on the same argumentation framework. It also includes representing preferences in EAF and multi-agent argumentation. Finally, the paper discusses complexity issues and computation using epistemic logic programming.
more »
« less
- Award ID(s):
- 1812628
- NSF-PAR ID:
- 10286650
- Date Published:
- Journal Name:
- Journal of artificial intelligence research
- Volume:
- 69
- ISSN:
- 1943-5037
- Page Range / eLocation ID:
- 1103-1126
- Format(s):
- Medium: X
- Sponsoring Org:
- National Science Foundation
More Like this
-
-
null (Ed.)Abstract Designing agents that reason and act upon the world has always been one of the main objectives of the Artificial Intelligence community. While for planning in “simple” domains the agents can solely rely on facts about the world, in several contexts, e.g. , economy, security, justice and politics, the mere knowledge of the world could be insufficient to reach a desired goal. In these scenarios, epistemic reasoning, i.e. , reasoning about agents’ beliefs about themselves and about other agents’ beliefs, is essential to design winning strategies. This paper addresses the problem of reasoning in multi-agent epistemic settings exploiting declarative programming techniques. In particular, the paper presents an actual implementation of a multi-shot Answer Set Programming -based planner that can reason in multi-agent epistemic settings, called PLATO (e P istemic mu L ti-agent A nswer se T programming s O lver). The ASP paradigm enables a concise and elegant design of the planner, w.r.t. other imperative implementations, facilitating the development of formal verification of correctness. The paper shows how the planner, exploiting an ad-hoc epistemic state representation and the efficiency of ASP solvers, has competitive performance results on benchmarks collected from the literature.more » « less
-
In this paper we develop a state transition function for partially observable multi-agent epistemic domains and implement it using Answer Set Programming (ASP). The transition function computes the next state upon an occurrence of a single action. Thus it can be used as a module in epistemic planners. Our transition function incorporates ontic, sensing and announcement actions and allows for arbitrary nested belief formulae and general common knowledge. A novel feature of our model is that upon an action occurrence, an observing agent corrects his (possibly wrong) initial beliefs about action precondition and his observability. By examples, we show that this step is necessary for robust state transition. We establish some properties of our state transition function regarding its soundness in updating beliefs of agents consistent with their observability.more » « less
-
In this presentation, the research team discussed teachers' facilitation of argumentation in teaching computer programming (or coding) and how it related to their epistemic beliefs about mathematics and science. The preliminary results showed that teachers engaged their students in both justificatory and inquiry arguments when teaching coding. This was not the case with respect to mathematics and science, in which teachers described engaging students either in justificatory or inquiry argumentation exclusively. The team proposes that these siloed uses of argumentation in mathematics and science relate to the teachers' epistemic beliefs about the disciplines, and their use of argumentation in coding builds on and goes beyond their experiences with argumentation in teaching mathematics and science.more » « less
-
Earlier epistemic planning systems for multi-agent domains generate plans that contain various types of actions such as ontic, sensing, or announcement actions. However, none of these systems consider untruthful announcements, i.e., none can generate plans that contain a lying or a misleading announcement. In this paper, we present a novel epistemic planner, called EFP3.0, for multi-agent domains with untruthful announcements. The planner is similar to the systems EFP or EFP2.0 in that it is a forward-search planner and can deal with unlimited nested beliefs and common knowledge by employing a Kripke based state representation and implementing an update model based transition function. Different from EFP, EFP3.0 employs a specification language that uses edge-conditioned update models for reasoning about effects of actions in multi-agent domains. We describe the basics of EFP3.0 and conduct experimental evaluations of the system against state-of-the-art epistemic planners. We discuss potential improvements that could be useful for scalability and efficiency of the system.more » « less
- Free Publicly Accessible Full Text
-
Accepted Manuscript1.0
- Journal Article:
- https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1613/jair.1.12121
