Empirical Evaluation of Strategies for Multiparty Argumentative Debates
Empirical Evaluation of Strategies for Multiparty Argumentative Debates
复制标题
多方辩论策略的实证评估
DOI：
--
复制
发表时间：
2014
期刊：
影响因子：
--
通讯作者：
Pavlos Moraitis
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Dionysios Kontarinis;Elise Bonzon;N. Maudet;Pavlos Moraitis
辩论代理人往往有不同的专业领域和相互矛盾的意见所讨论的主题。他们面临的问题是决定如何为目前的辩论作出贡献，以满足他们的个人目标。我们专注于目标集，指定最小的变化对当前状态的辩论，允许代理，以满足他们的目标，其中的变化是增加和/或删除的参数之间的攻击。在本文中，我们通过实验测试了一些基于目标集的策略，并根据不同的标准对它们进行评估，如辩论的长度，代理人的幸福程度以及结果的合理性。
Debating agents have often different areas of expertise and conflicting opinions on the subjects under discussion. They are faced with the problem of deciding how to contribute to the current state of the debate in order to satisfy their personal goals. We focus on target sets, that specify minimal changes on the current state of the debate allowing agents to satisfy their goals, where changes are the addition and/or deletion of attacks among arguments. In this paper, we experimentally test a number of strategies based on target sets, and we evaluate them with respect to different criteria, as the length of the debate, the happiness of the agents, and the rationality of the result.