用论证模型实现部分共识下的决策承诺，提升动态环境中的协作可靠性。
Disagree and Commit: Degrees of Argumentation-based Agreements
- 基于抽象与价值论证框架定义同意程度度量
- 提出最小/均值/中位同意度，量化部分共识的稳定性
- 适用于需动态调整的自主系统协作场景
在人类协作决策中，完全一致并非必需；只要对各方未来能遵守承诺有一定信心，部分共识即可推动决策。本文引入基于论证的同意情景模型，使自主智能体可达成此类部分共识。通过抽象论证与基于价值的论证框架，提出满意程度及最小、平均、中位同意度等度量，并分析新信息加入后同意度的变化，以评估动态环境中部分共识的可靠性。相关概念已实现在一个基于论证推理的软件库中。
原文摘要 · Abstract (English)
In cooperative human decision-making, agreements are often not total; a partial degree of agreement is sufficient to commit to a decision and move on, as long as one is somewhat confident that the involved parties are likely to stand by their commitment in the future, given no drastic unexpected changes. In this paper, we introduce the notion of agreement scenarios that allow artificial autonomous agents to reach such agreements, using formal models of argumentation, in particular abstract argumentation and value-based argumentation. We introduce the notions of degrees of satisfaction and (minimum, mean, and median) agreement, as well as a measure of the impact a value in a value-based argumentation framework has on these notions. We then analyze how degrees of agreement are affected when agreement scenarios are expanded with new information, to shed light on the reliability of partial agreements in dynamic scenarios. An implementation of the introduced concepts is provided as part of an argumentation-based reasoning software library.
Thank you to arXiv for use of its open access interoperability. PaperDance 不是 arXiv 官方产品；中文卡片由大模型生成，请以原文为准。