Manipulation in Group Argument Evaluation
Proceedings of the Twenty-Second International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence. Pages 121-125.
Abstract
Given an argumentation framework and a group of agents, the individuals may have divergent opinions on the status of the arguments. If the group needsto reach a common position on the argumentation framework, the question is how the individual evaluations can be mapped into a collective one. Thisproblem has been recently investigated by Caminada and Pigozzi. In this paper, we investigate the behaviour of two of such operators from a socialchoice-theoretic point of view. In particular, we study under which conditions these operators are Pareto optimal and whether they are manipulable.
@inproceedings{ijcai2011p32,
title = {Manipulation in Group Argument Evaluation},
author = {Caminada, Martin and Pigozzi, Gabriella and Podlaszewski, Mikolaj},
booktitle = {Proceedings of the Twenty-Second International Joint Conference on
Artificial Intelligence, {IJCAI-11}},
publisher = {AAAI Press/International Joint Conferences on Artificial Intelligence},
editor = {Toby Walsh},
pages = {121--125},
year = {2011},
month = {7},
doi = {10.5591/978-1-57735-516-8/IJCAI11-032},
url = {https://doi.org/10.5591/978-1-57735-516-8/IJCAI11-032},
}
TY - CPAPER TI - Manipulation in Group Argument Evaluation AU - Caminada, Martin AU - Pigozzi, Gabriella AU - Podlaszewski, Mikolaj T2 - Proceedings of the Twenty-Second International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence, IJCAI-11 PB - AAAI Press/International Joint Conferences on Artificial Intelligence PY - 2011 SP - 121 EP - 125 DO - 10.5591/978-1-57735-516-8/IJCAI11-032 UR - https://doi.org/10.5591/978-1-57735-516-8/IJCAI11-032 ER -Copied
Machine-readable versions of this paper, for tools and AI agents: