References of "Boella, Guido 30000076"
     in
Bookmark and Share    
Full Text
Peer Reviewed
See detailOn Input/Output Argumentation Frameworks
Baroni, Pietro UL; Boella, Guido UL; Cerutti, Federico et al

in Proceedings of COMMA (2012)

This paper introduces Input/Output Argumentation Frameworks, a novel approach to characterize the behavior of an argumentation framework as a sort of black box exposing a well-defined external interface ... [more ▼]

This paper introduces Input/Output Argumentation Frameworks, a novel approach to characterize the behavior of an argumentation framework as a sort of black box exposing a well-defined external interface. As a starting point, we define the novel notion of semantics decomposability and analyze complete, stable, grounded and preferred semantics in this respect. Then we show as a main result that, under grounded, complete, stable and credulous preferred semantics, Input/Output Argumentation Frameworks with the same behavior can be interchanged without affecting the result of semantics evaluation of other arguments interacting with them [less ▲]

Detailed reference viewed: 34 (3 UL)
Full Text
Peer Reviewed
See detailDynamics in Delegation and Revocation Schemes: A Logical Approach
Aucher, Guillaume UL; Barker, Steve; Boella, Guido UL et al

in DBSec (2011)

In this paper we first introduce a logic for describing formally a family of delegation and revocation models that are based on the work in Hagström et al.. We then extend our logic to accommodate an ... [more ▼]

In this paper we first introduce a logic for describing formally a family of delegation and revocation models that are based on the work in Hagström et al.. We then extend our logic to accommodate an epistemic interpretation of trust within the framework that we define. What emerges from this work is a rich framework of formally well-defined delegation and revocation schemes that accommodates an important trust component. [less ▲]

Detailed reference viewed: 62 (1 UL)
Full Text
Peer Reviewed
See detailA Satisficing Agreements Model
Boella, Guido UL; Pigozzi, Gabriella UL; Slavkovik, Marija UL et al

in Proceedings of the 13th International Workshop on Coordination, Organization, Institutions and Norms (COIN@WI-IAT) (2011)

Satisficing, the concept proposed by Herbert Simon, as an approach to reaching agreements is little explored. We propose a model for satisficing agreement reaching for an adaptive collaborative group of ... [more ▼]

Satisficing, the concept proposed by Herbert Simon, as an approach to reaching agreements is little explored. We propose a model for satisficing agreement reaching for an adaptive collaborative group of agents. The group consists of one human agent familiar with the problem and arbitrarily many artificial agents. Our model raises to the team level the recognition-primed decision model constructed in the field of cognitive decision-making by using social choice for reaching group opinions. [less ▲]

Detailed reference viewed: 44 (0 UL)
Full Text
Peer Reviewed
See detailTrust in Abstract Argumentation
Boella, Guido UL; van der Torre, Leon UL; Villata, Serena

in Proceedings of the 4th Mahasarakham International Workshop on Artificial Intelligence (MIWAI'10) (2010)

Detailed reference viewed: 23 (0 UL)
Full Text
Peer Reviewed
See detailA Logical Understanding of Legal Interpretation
Boella, Guido UL; Governatori, Guido; Rotolo, Antonino et al

in KR 2010 (2010)

If compliance with a norm does not achieve its purpose, then its applicability must dynamically be restricted or expanded. Legal interpretation is a mechanism from law allowing norms to be adapted to ... [more ▼]

If compliance with a norm does not achieve its purpose, then its applicability must dynamically be restricted or expanded. Legal interpretation is a mechanism from law allowing norms to be adapted to unforeseen situations. We model this mechanism for norms regulating computer systems by representing the purpose of norms by social goals and by revising the constitutive rules defining the applicability of norms. We illustrate the interpretation mechanism by examples. [less ▲]

Detailed reference viewed: 54 (0 UL)
Full Text
Peer Reviewed
See detailGroup Intentions are Social Choice with Commitment
Boella, Guido UL; Pigozzi, Gabriella UL; Slavkovik, Marija UL et al

in Pre-Procs. of the 11th International Workshop on Coordination, Optimization, Institution and Norms in Multiagent Systems (COIN@MALLOW'10) (2010)

An agent intends g if it has chosen to pursue goal g an is committed to pursuing g . How do groups decide on a common goal? Social epistemology offers two views on collective attitudes: according to the ... [more ▼]

An agent intends g if it has chosen to pursue goal g an is committed to pursuing g . How do groups decide on a common goal? Social epistemology offers two views on collective attitudes: according to the summative approach, a group has attitude p if all or most of the group members have the attitude p; according to the non-summative approach, for a group to have attitude p it is required that the members together agree that they have attitude p. The summative approach is used extensively in multi-agent systems. We propose a formalization of non-summative group intentions, using social choice to determine the group goals. We use judgment aggregation as a decision-making mechanism and a multi-modal multi-agent logic to represent the collective attitudes, as well as the commitment and revision strategies for the groups intentions. [less ▲]

Detailed reference viewed: 29 (0 UL)
Full Text
Peer Reviewed
See detailSupport in Abstract Argumentation
Boella, Guido UL; Gabbay, Dov M. UL; van der Torre, Leon UL et al

in Proceedings of the Third International Conference on Computational Models of Argument (COMMA'10) (2010)

n this paper, we consider two drawbacks of Cayrol and Lagasque-Schiex's meta-argumentation theory to model bipolar argumentation frameworks. We consider first the “lost of admissibility” in Dung's sense ... [more ▼]

n this paper, we consider two drawbacks of Cayrol and Lagasque-Schiex's meta-argumentation theory to model bipolar argumentation frameworks. We consider first the “lost of admissibility” in Dung's sense and second, the definition of notions of attack in the context of a support relation. We show how to prevent these drawbacks by introducing support meta-arguments. Like the model of Cayrol and Lagasque-Schiex, our formalization confirms the use of meta-argumentation to reuse Dung's properties. We do not take a stance towards the usefulness of a support relation among arguments, though we show that if one would like to introduce them, it can be done without extending Dung's theory. Finally, we show how to use meta-argumentation to instantiate an argumentation framework to represent defeasible support. In this model of support, the support relation itself can be attacked. [less ▲]

Detailed reference viewed: 84 (0 UL)
Full Text
Peer Reviewed
See detailArguing about Trust in Multiagent Systems
Villata, Serena; Boella, Guido UL; Gabbay, Dov M. UL et al

in Proceedings of the 11th Symposium on Artificial Intelligence of the Italian Association for Artificial Intelligence (AIIA'10) (2010)

Trust in multiagent systems is used for seeking to minimize the uncertainty in the interactions among the agents. In this paper, we discuss how to use argumentation to reason about trust. Using the ... [more ▼]

Trust in multiagent systems is used for seeking to minimize the uncertainty in the interactions among the agents. In this paper, we discuss how to use argumentation to reason about trust. Using the methodology of meta-argumentation, first we represent the source of the information from which the argument is constructed in the abstract argumentation framework capturing the fact that b is attacked because b is from a particular source s. We show how a source of information can be attacked if it is not evaluated as trustworthy. Second, we provide a fine grained representation of the trust relationships between the information sources in which trust concerns not only the sources but also the single arguments and attack relations the sources propose. Moreover, we represent the evidences in support of the arguments which are put forward by the information sources and the agents can express arguments by referring to other agents’ arguments. Meta-argumentation allows us not to extend Dung’s abstract argumentation framework by introducing trust and to reuse those principles and properties defined for Dung’s framework. [less ▲]

Detailed reference viewed: 17 (0 UL)
Full Text
Peer Reviewed
See detailHigher-Order Coalition Logic
Boella, Guido UL; Gabbay, Dov M. UL; Genovese, Valerio UL et al

in Bibliothèque(s) : revue de l'Association des bibliothécaires de France (2010)

We introduce and study higher-order coalition logic, a multi modal monadic second-order logic with operators [{x}ψ]φ expressing that the coalition of all agents satisfying ψ(x) can achieve a state in ... [more ▼]

We introduce and study higher-order coalition logic, a multi modal monadic second-order logic with operators [{x}ψ]φ expressing that the coalition of all agents satisfying ψ(x) can achieve a state in which φ holds. We use neighborhood semantics to model extensive games of perfect information with simultaneous actions and we provide a framework reasoning about agents in the same way as it is reasoning about their abilities. We illustrate higher-order coalition logic to represent and reason about coalition formation and cooperation, we show a more general and expressive way to quantify over coalitions than quantified coalition logic, we give an axiomatization and prove completeness. [less ▲]

Detailed reference viewed: 21 (0 UL)
Full Text
Peer Reviewed
See detailFive guidelines for normative multiagent systems
Boella, Guido UL; Pigozzi, Gabriella UL; van der Torre, Leon UL

in Proceedings of JURIX 2009 - The 22nd International Conference on Legal Knowledge and Information Systems (2009, December)

n this paper we introduce and discuss five guidelines for the use of normative systems in computer science. We adopt a multiagent systems perspective, because norms are used to coordinate, organize, guide ... [more ▼]

n this paper we introduce and discuss five guidelines for the use of normative systems in computer science. We adopt a multiagent systems perspective, because norms are used to coordinate, organize, guide, regulate or control interaction among distributed autonomous systems. They are derived from the computer science literature. From the so-called ‘normchange’ definition of the first workshop on normative multiagent systems in 2005 we derive the guidelines to motivate which definition of normative multiagent system is used, to make explicit why norms are a kind of (soft) constraints deserving special analysis, and to explain why and how norms can be changed at runtime. From the so-called ‘mechanism design’ definition of the second workshop on normative multiagent systems in 2007 we derive the guidelines to discuss the use and role of norms as a mechanism in a game-theoretic setting, and to clarify the role of norms in the multiagent system. [less ▲]

Detailed reference viewed: 51 (0 UL)
Full Text
Peer Reviewed
See detailAlgorithms for finding coalitions exploiting a new reciprocity condition
Boella, Guido UL; Sauro, Luigi UL; van der Torre, Leon UL

in Logic Journal of the IGPL (2009), 17(3), 273297

We introduce a reciprocity criterion for coalition formation among goal-directed agents, which we call the indecomposable do-ut-des property. It refines an older reciprocity property, called the do-ut-des ... [more ▼]

We introduce a reciprocity criterion for coalition formation among goal-directed agents, which we call the indecomposable do-ut-des property. It refines an older reciprocity property, called the do-ut-des or give-to-get property by considering the fact that agents prefer to form coalitions whose components cannot be formed independently. A formal description of this property is provided as well as an analysis of algorithms and their complexity. We provide an algorithm to decide whether a coalition has the desired property, and we show that the problem to verify whether a single coalition satisfies the property is tractable. Moreover, we provide an algorithm to search all the sub-coalitions of a given coalition satisfying the new property. Even if this problem is not computationally tractable, we show that in several cases, also the complexity of this problem may decrease considerably. [less ▲]

Detailed reference viewed: 45 (0 UL)
Full Text
Peer Reviewed
See detailMeta-Argumentation part 1
Boella, Guido UL; Gabbay, Dov M. UL; van der Torre, Leon UL et al

in Studia Logica (2009)

In this paper, we introduce the methodology and techniques of meta-argumentation to model argumentation. The methodology of meta-argumentation instantiates Dung’s abstract argumentation theory with an ... [more ▼]

In this paper, we introduce the methodology and techniques of meta-argumentation to model argumentation. The methodology of meta-argumentation instantiates Dung’s abstract argumentation theory with an extended argumentation theory, and is thus based on a combination of the methodology of instantiating abstract arguments, and the methodology of extending Dung’s basic argumentation frameworks with other relations among abstract arguments. The technique of meta-argumentation applies Dung’s theory of abstract argumentation to itself, by instantiating Dung’s abstract arguments with meta-arguments using a technique called flattening. We characterize the domain of instantiation using a representation technique based on soundness and completeness. Finally, we distinguish among various instantiations using the technique of specification languages. [less ▲]

Detailed reference viewed: 27 (0 UL)
Full Text
Peer Reviewed
See detailFour measures for the dynamics of coalitions in social networks
Boella, Guido UL; van der Torre, Leon UL; Villata, Serena

in Four measures for the dynamics of coalitions in social networks (2009)

We introduce four measures for the change of coalitions in social networks. The first one measures the change of the agents in the network over time, The second one measures the change of dependencies ... [more ▼]

We introduce four measures for the change of coalitions in social networks. The first one measures the change of the agents in the network over time, The second one measures the change of dependencies among the agents, due to addition or removal of powers and goals of the agents. The third one measures the change in normative dependencies like obligations and prohibitions introduced by norms. The fourth one measures changes in coalitions. If one of the first three measures is high, then the fourth measure is probably high too, if the change in agents and dependencies is a cause for a change in coalitions. If the first three measures are low, but the change in coalitions is high, it is due to internal processes like violations of the coalition agreements. [less ▲]

Detailed reference viewed: 38 (0 UL)
Full Text
Peer Reviewed
See detailRepresenting Excuses in Social Dependence Networks
Boella, Guido UL; Broersen, Jan UL; van der Torre, Leon UL et al

in AI*IA (2009)

In this paper, we propose a representation of excuses in the context of multiagent systems. We distinguish five classes of excuses, taking as starting point both jurisprudential and philosophical studies ... [more ▼]

In this paper, we propose a representation of excuses in the context of multiagent systems. We distinguish five classes of excuses, taking as starting point both jurisprudential and philosophical studies about this topic, and we discuss their acceptance criteria. We highlight the following classes of excuses: epistemic excuses, power-based excuses, norm-based excuses, counts as-based excuses and social-based excuses and we represent them using social dependence networks. The acceptance criteria individuate those excuses which success in maintaining the trust of the other agents, e.g. in the context of social networks, excuses based on norms seem better than counts as-based ones in achieving this aim. [less ▲]

Detailed reference viewed: 39 (0 UL)
Full Text
Peer Reviewed
See detailSocial network semantics for agent communication
Boella, Guido UL; Hulstijn, Joris UL; van der Torre, Leon UL

in Social network semantics for agent communication (2009)

In this paper we introduce a semantics for agent communication languages based on social networks, providing us with a principled way to define and reason about their dynamics. As an instance we consider ... [more ▼]

In this paper we introduce a semantics for agent communication languages based on social networks, providing us with a principled way to define and reason about their dynamics. As an instance we consider dependence networks, where the social relations represent that an agent depends on another agent to achieve its intentions. We suggest how FIPA semantics can be reconstructed in this social semantics. Our approach reveals that we need special semantics for relations like ownership, authority or fear: all kinds of interesting social relations, not previously studied by multiagent systems. [less ▲]

Detailed reference viewed: 25 (0 UL)
Full Text
Peer Reviewed
See detailNormative framework for normative system change
Boella, Guido UL; Pigozzi, Gabriella UL; van der Torre, Leon UL

in Normative framework for normative system change (2009)

Normative systems in a multiagent system must be able to evolve over time, for example due to actions creating or removing norms in the system. The only formal framework to evaluate and classify normative ... [more ▼]

Normative systems in a multiagent system must be able to evolve over time, for example due to actions creating or removing norms in the system. The only formal framework to evaluate and classify normative system change methods is the so-called AGM framework of theory change, which has originally been developed as a framework to describe and classify both belief and normative system change. However, it has been used for belief change only, since the beliefs or norms are represented as propositional formulas. We therefore propose, as a normative framework for normative system change, to replace propositional formulas in the AGM framework of theory change by pairs of propositional formulas, representing the rule based character of norms, and to add several principles from the input/output logic framework. In this new framework, we show that some of the AGM properties cannot be expressed, and other properties are consistent only for some logics, but not for others. [less ▲]

Detailed reference viewed: 26 (0 UL)
Full Text
Peer Reviewed
See detailOn the Acceptability of Meta-Arguments
Boella, Guido UL; van der Torre, Leon UL; Villata, Serena

in IAT 2009: Procs. of IEEE/WIC/ACM International Conference on Intelligent Agent Technology (2009)

In this paper we introduce a theory of meta-argumentation, by using Dung’s theory of abstract argumentation to reason about itself. Meta-arguments are generated from atomic arguments, and extensions of ... [more ▼]

In this paper we introduce a theory of meta-argumentation, by using Dung’s theory of abstract argumentation to reason about itself. Meta-arguments are generated from atomic arguments, and extensions of acceptable meta-arguments are based on Dung’s argumentation semantics. To illustrate our theory, we show how to represent Toulmin schemes in this theory by introducing meta-arguments using the Caminada labeling, and meta-arguments for support [less ▲]

Detailed reference viewed: 41 (0 UL)
Full Text
Peer Reviewed
See detailNormative systems in computer science. Ten guidelines for normative multiagent systems
Boella, Guido UL; Pigozzi, Gabriella UL; van der Torre, Leon UL

in Normative Multi-Agent Systems, Dagstuhl Seminar Proceedings 09121 (2009)

In this paper we introduce and discuss ten guidelines for the use of normative systems in computer science. We adopt a multiagent sys- tems perspective, because norms are used to coordinate, organize ... [more ▼]

In this paper we introduce and discuss ten guidelines for the use of normative systems in computer science. We adopt a multiagent sys- tems perspective, because norms are used to coordinate, organize, guide, regulate or control interaction among distributed autonomous systems. The first six guidelines are derived from the computer science literature. From the so-called ‘normchange’ definition of the first workshop on nor- mative multiagent systems in 2005 we derive the guidelines to motivate which definition of normative multiagent system is used, to make explicit why norms are a kind of (soft) constraints deserving special analysis, and to explain why and how norms can be changed at runtime. From the so-called ‘mechanism design’ definition of the second workshop on nor- mative multiagent systems in 2007 we derive the guidelines to discuss the use and role of norms as a mechanism in a game-theoretic setting, clarify the role of norms in the multiagent system, and to relate the no- tion of “norm” to the legal, social, or moral literature. The remaining four guidelines follow from the philosophical literature: use norms also to resolve dilemmas, and in general to coordinate, organize, guide, regulate or control interaction among agents, distinguish norms from obligations, prohibitions and permissions, use the deontic paradoxes only to illustrate the normative multiagent system, and consider regulative norms in rela- tion to other kinds of norms and other social-cognitive computer science concepts. [less ▲]

Detailed reference viewed: 96 (0 UL)
Full Text
Peer Reviewed
See detailThe Interplay between Relationships, Roles and Objects
Boella, Guido UL; van der Torre, Leon UL

in Proceedings of FSEN09 (2009)

In this paper we study the interconnection between relationships and roles. We start from the patterns used to introduce relationships in object oriented languages, and we show how the role model proposed ... [more ▼]

In this paper we study the interconnection between relationships and roles. We start from the patterns used to introduce relationships in object oriented languages, and we show how the role model proposed in powerJava can be used to define roles. In particular, we focus on how to implement roles in an abstract way in objects representing relationships, and to specify the interconnections between the roles. Abstract roles cannot be instantiated. To participate in a relationship, objects have to extend the abstract roles of the relationship. Only when roles are implemented in the objects offering them, they can be instantiated, thus allowing another object to play those roles. [less ▲]

Detailed reference viewed: 40 (0 UL)
Full Text
Peer Reviewed
See detailAnalyzing Cooperation in Iterative Social Network Design
Boella, Guido UL; van der Torre, Leon UL; Villata, Serena

in Journal of Universal Computer Science (2009), 15(13),

We introduce an approach to iteratively design `small' social networks used in software engineering together with methods analyzing the cooperation in the system. The degree of cooperation is measured by ... [more ▼]

We introduce an approach to iteratively design `small' social networks used in software engineering together with methods analyzing the cooperation in the system. The degree of cooperation is measured by the emergence of coalitions and their stability over time. At the most abstract level, which we call the coalition view, coalitions are abstract entities that may dominate or attack other coalitions. During iterative design, these abstract entities are refined with agents and their dependencies constituting the coalitions (dependence view), the powers of sets of agents to see to goals (power view) and finally the beliefs, plans, tasks and goals of agents (agent view). The analysis methods predict the emergence of coalitions based on reciprocity and argumentation theory. [less ▲]

Detailed reference viewed: 18 (1 UL)