Recognized as vital in a group decision-making process, deliberation allows stakeholders discussing and reaching agreements on controversial issues before making ultimate decisions. It brings several benefits, one of which is ensuring well-informed and well-accepted decisions. Its backbone is argumentation, which consists of justifying claims by arguments, i.e., reasons behind claims. The greatest challenges facing deliberation systems are identifying, evaluating, and aggregating large sets of interacting arguments, generally of disparate types, and solving potential disagreements between stakeholders. In this talk, I will introduce abstract argumentation frameworks for deliberation, their formal foundations, and discuss their possible impacts on group decisions.

Leila Amgoud is a senior researcher at the French National Centre for Scientific Research (CNRS), a member of the IRIT Lab in Toulouse, and a deputy director of the same lab. She holds a M.Sc. (1996), a PhD (1999) and an Habilitation à Diriger des Recherches (2009) in Computer Science from the Paul Sabatier University, Toulouse, France. She is currently an Associate Editor of the Artificial Intelligence Journal and the Journal of Argument and Computation. She has been an EurAI Fellow since 2014. Her research interests are centered around knowledge representation and reasoning. She is specifically interested in argumentation-based approaches for reasoning and decision making under uncertainty, and more recently in explainability of AI models. She holds two chairs on “explainability” and “argumentation-based deliberation” at the interdisciplinary Artificial and Natural Intelligence Toulouse Institute (ANITI).

Argumentation-based Deliberation: Foundations and Challenges

Deixe um comentário

O seu endereço de email não será publicado. Campos obrigatórios marcados com *