An empirical study of argumentation schemes for deliberative dialogue

摘要: Collaborative decision making among agents in a team is complex activity, and tasks to achieve individual objectives may conflict context. A number of argumentation-based models have been proposed address the problem, rationale being that revelation background information constraints can aid discovery resolution conflicts. To date, however, no empirical studies conducted substantiate these claims. In this paper, we discuss model, grounded on argumentation schemes, captures potential conflicts due scheduling causality constraints, goals norms. We evaluate model collaborative planning problems show such facilitates sharing relevant pertaining plan, goal normative Further, focussed leads more effective resolution, particularly most challenging problems.