DROPS

Document

DOI: 10.4230/OASIcs.ICCSW.2012.62

Mechanisms for Opponent Modelling

Authors: Christos Hadjinikolis, Sanjay Modgil, Elizabeth Black, and Peter McBurney

Published in: OASIcs, Volume 28, 2012 Imperial College Computing Student Workshop

Abstract

In various competitive game contexts, gathering information about one's opponent and relying on it for planning a strategy has been the dominant approach for numerous researchers who deal with what in game theoretic terms is known as the best response problem. This approach is known as opponent modelling. The general idea is given a model of one's adversary to rely on it for simulating the possible ways based on which a game may evolve, so as to then choose out of a number of response options the most suitable~in relation to one's goals. Similarly, many approaches concerned with strategising in the context of dialogue games rely on such models for implementing and employing strategies. In most cases though, the methodologies and the formal procedures based on which an opponent model may be built and updated receive little attention, as they are usually left implicit. In this paper we assume a general framework for argumentation-based persuasion dialogue, and we rely on a logical conception of arguments - based on the recent ASPIC^+ model for argumentation - to formally define a number of mechanisms based on which an opponent model may be built, updated, and augmented.

Cite as

Christos Hadjinikolis, Sanjay Modgil, Elizabeth Black, and Peter McBurney. Mechanisms for Opponent Modelling. In 2012 Imperial College Computing Student Workshop. Open Access Series in Informatics (OASIcs), Volume 28, pp. 62-68, Schloss Dagstuhl – Leibniz-Zentrum für Informatik (2012)

Copy BibTex To Clipboard

@InProceedings{hadjinikolis_et_al:OASIcs.ICCSW.2012.62,
  author =	{Hadjinikolis, Christos and Modgil, Sanjay and Black, Elizabeth and McBurney, Peter},
  title =	{{Mechanisms for Opponent Modelling}},
  booktitle =	{2012 Imperial College Computing Student Workshop},
  pages =	{62--68},
  series =	{Open Access Series in Informatics (OASIcs)},
  ISBN =	{978-3-939897-48-4},
  ISSN =	{2190-6807},
  year =	{2012},
  volume =	{28},
  editor =	{Jones, Andrew V.},
  publisher =	{Schloss Dagstuhl -- Leibniz-Zentrum f{\"u}r Informatik},
  address =	{Dagstuhl, Germany},
  URL =		{https://drops.dagstuhl.de/entities/document/10.4230/OASIcs.ICCSW.2012.62},
  URN =		{urn:nbn:de:0030-drops-37663},
  doi =		{10.4230/OASIcs.ICCSW.2012.62},
  annote =	{Keywords: dialogue, strategies, argumentation, opponent model}
}

Document

DOI: 10.4230/DagSemProc.09121.11

Argumentation based Resolution of Conflicts Between Desires and Normative Goals

Authors: Sanjay Modgil and Michael Luck

Published in: Dagstuhl Seminar Proceedings, Volume 9121, Normative Multi-Agent Systems (2009)

Abstract

Norms represent what ought to be done, and their fulfillment can be seen as benefiting the overall system, society or organisation. However, individual agent goals (desire) may conflict with system norms. If a decision to comply with a norm is determined exclusively by an agent or, conversely, if norms are rigidly enforced, then system performance may be degraded, and individual agent goals may be inappropriately obstructed. To prevent such deleterious effects we propose a general framework for argumentation-based resolution of conflicts amongst desires and norms. In this framework, arguments for and against compliance are arguments justifying rewards, respectively punishments, exacted by `enforcing' agents. The arguments are evaluated in a recent extension to Dung's abstract argumentation framework, in order that the agents can engage in metalevel argumentation as to whether the rewards and punishments have the required motivational force. We provide an example instantiation of the framework based on a logic programming formalism.

Cite as

Sanjay Modgil and Michael Luck. Argumentation based Resolution of Conflicts Between Desires and Normative Goals. In Normative Multi-Agent Systems. Dagstuhl Seminar Proceedings, Volume 9121, pp. 1-18, Schloss Dagstuhl – Leibniz-Zentrum für Informatik (2009)

Copy BibTex To Clipboard

@InProceedings{modgil_et_al:DagSemProc.09121.11,
  author =	{Modgil, Sanjay and Luck, Michael},
  title =	{{Argumentation based Resolution of Conflicts Between Desires and Normative Goals}},
  booktitle =	{Normative Multi-Agent Systems},
  pages =	{1--18},
  series =	{Dagstuhl Seminar Proceedings (DagSemProc)},
  ISSN =	{1862-4405},
  year =	{2009},
  volume =	{9121},
  editor =	{Guido Boella and Pablo Noriega and Gabriella Pigozzi and Harko Verhagen},
  publisher =	{Schloss Dagstuhl -- Leibniz-Zentrum f{\"u}r Informatik},
  address =	{Dagstuhl, Germany},
  URL =		{https://drops.dagstuhl.de/entities/document/10.4230/DagSemProc.09121.11},
  URN =		{urn:nbn:de:0030-drops-19124},
  doi =		{10.4230/DagSemProc.09121.11},
  annote =	{Keywords: Argumentation, Norms, Desires, Conflicts}
}

Search Results

Documents authored by Modgil, Sanjay

Mechanisms for Opponent Modelling

Abstract

Cite as

Argumentation based Resolution of Conflicts Between Desires and Normative Goals

Abstract

Cite as

Thanks for your feedback!

Could not send message