Authors:
Hiroyuki Kido
1
;
Katsumi Nitta
1
;
Masahito Kurihara
1
and
Daisuke Katagami
2
Affiliations:
1
Tokyo Institute of Technology, Japan
;
2
Tokyo Polytechnic University, Japan
Keyword(s):
Argument-based reasoning, Compromise, Dialectical thought, Deliberation.
Related
Ontology
Subjects/Areas/Topics:
Agents
;
Artificial Intelligence
;
Artificial Intelligence and Decision Support Systems
;
Distributed and Mobile Software Systems
;
Enterprise Information Systems
;
Knowledge Engineering and Ontology Development
;
Knowledge Representation and Reasoning
;
Knowledge-Based Systems
;
Multi-Agent Systems
;
Software Engineering
;
Symbolic Systems
Abstract:
Chinese traditional philosophy regards dialectics as a style of reasoning that focuses on contradictions and how to resolve them, transcend them or find the truth in both. Compromise is considered to be one possible way to resolve conflicts dialectically. In this paper, we formalize dialectical reasoning as a way for deriving compromise. Both the definition of the notion of compromise and the algorithm for dialectical reasoning are proposed on an abstract complete lattice. We prove that the dialectical reasoning is sound and complete with respect to the compromise. We propose the concrete algorithm for dialectical reasoning characterized by definite clausal language and generalized subsumption. The algorithm is proved to be sound with respect to the compromise. Furthermore, we expand an argumentation system to handle compromise arguments, and illustrate that an agent bringing up a compromise argument realizes a compromise based justification towards argument-based deliberation.