Mapping persuasive dialogue games onto argumentation structures

Simon Wells, Andrew Ravenscroft, Musbah Sagar, Chris Reed

    Research output: Chapter in Book/Report/Conference proceedingOther chapter contribution

    4 Citations (Scopus)

    Abstract

    This paper reports on some prelimary research into how software tools like InterLoc can be used as an interface to the WorldWide Argument Web (WWAW) and how the WWAW in return can provide a useful resource to agents acting within InterLoc. Two persuasive dialogue games, the human-oriented Critical Reasoning Game (CRG) from InterLoc and the philosophy-based agent-oriented game for permissive persuasion named PPD0 are compared using the Dialogue Game Description Language (DGDL) as an interlingua. The expressiveness of each game is investigated by mapping output dialogues onto argumentation structures represented in the Argument Interchange Format (AIF).
    Original languageEnglish
    Title of host publicationAdaptive and emergent behaviour and complex systems
    Subtitle of host publicationproceedings of the 23rd convention of the Society for the Study of Artificial Intelligence and Simulation of Behaviour, AISB 2009
    Place of PublicationLondon
    PublisherSociety for the Study of Artificial Intelligence and Simulation of Behaviour
    Pages53-56
    ISBN (Print)1902956745
    Publication statusPublished - 2009
    EventAISB 2009 Convention Adaptive and Emergent Behaviour and Complex Systems: Persuasive Technology and Digital Behaviour Intervention Symposium - Edinburgh, United Kingdom
    Duration: 6 Apr 20099 Apr 2009
    http://www.aisb.org.uk/convention/aisb09/index.php

    Conference

    ConferenceAISB 2009 Convention Adaptive and Emergent Behaviour and Complex Systems: Persuasive Technology and Digital Behaviour Intervention Symposium
    Abbreviated titleAISB 2009
    Country/TerritoryUnited Kingdom
    CityEdinburgh
    Period6/04/099/04/09
    Internet address

    Fingerprint

    Dive into the research topics of 'Mapping persuasive dialogue games onto argumentation structures'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

    Cite this