nach oben

Erschienen in:

2017 | OriginalPaper | Buchkapitel

Quantitative Argumentation Debates with Votes for Opinion Polling

verfasst von : Antonio Rago, Francesca Toni

Erschienen in: PRIMA 2017: Principles and Practice of Multi-Agent Systems

Verlag: Springer International Publishing

Einloggen

Aktivieren Sie unsere intelligente Suche, um passende Fachinhalte oder Patente zu finden.

search-config

KI-gestützte Suche

Aus

Abstract

Opinion polls are used in a variety of settings to assess the opinions of a population, but they mostly conceal the reasoning behind these opinions. Argumentation, as understood in AI, can be used to evaluate opinions in dialectical exchanges, transparently articulating the reasoning behind the opinions. We give a method integrating argumentation within opinion polling to empower voters to add new statements that render their opinions in the polls individually rational while at the same time justifying them. We then show how these poll results can be amalgamated to give a collectively rational set of voters in an argumentation framework. Our method relies upon Quantitative Argumentation Debate for Voting (QuAD-V) frameworks, which extend QuAD frameworks (a form of bipolar argumentation frameworks in which arguments have an intrinsic strength) with votes expressing individuals’ opinions on arguments.

Sie haben noch keine Lizenz? Dann Informieren Sie sich jetzt über unsere Produkte:

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

über 102.000 Bücher
über 537 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

Automobil + Motoren
Bauwesen + Immobilien
Business IT + Informatik
Elektrotechnik + Elektronik
Energie + Nachhaltigkeit
Finance + Banking
Management + Führung
Marketing + Vertrieb
Maschinenbau + Werkstoffe
Versicherung + Risiko

Jetzt Wissensvorsprung sichern!

Jetzt informieren

Springer Professional "Technik"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Technik" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

über 67.000 Bücher
über 390 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

Automobil + Motoren
Bauwesen + Immobilien
Business IT + Informatik
Elektrotechnik + Elektronik
Energie + Nachhaltigkeit
Maschinenbau + Werkstoffe

Jetzt Wissensvorsprung sichern!

Jetzt informieren

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Wirtschaft" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

über 67.000 Bücher
über 340 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

Bauwesen + Immobilien
Business IT + Informatik
Finance + Banking
Management + Führung
Marketing + Vertrieb
Versicherung + Risiko

Jetzt Wissensvorsprung sichern!

Jetzt informieren

Vorheriges Kapitel Formal Models of Conflicting Social Influence

Nächstes Kapitel Capturing Bipolar Argumentation in Non-flat Assumption-Based Argumentation

yougov.co.uk.

www.getwhichit.com.

https://ig.ft.com/sites/brexit-polling/.

http://fivethirtyeight.com/features/the-polls-missed-trump-we-asked-pollsters-why/.

www.bbc.co.uk/news/election-us-2016-37943072.

www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2016/nov/09/polls-wrong-donald-trump-election.

www.newyorker.com/news/john-cassidy/why-the-remain-campaign-lost-the-brexit-vote.

www.theguardian.com/business/2016/sep/16/truth-lies-and-trust-in-the-age-of-brexit-and-trump.

www.edition.cnn.com/2016/06/25/politics/uk-referendum-regrexit/index.html.

This requirement is imposed without loss of generality (see [1]).

From here onwards, we give only the components of \(\mathcal {Q}_{j\,+\,1}^{u_{i}}\) different to those in \(\mathcal {Q}_{j}^{u_{i}}\).

Note that, as we state at the beginning of Sect. 7, users may change their votes on these “unseen” arguments if multiple runs of the process depicted in Fig. 2 occur. We leave the study of multiple runs to future work.

Baroni, P., Romano, M., Toni, F., Aurisicchio, M., Bertanza, G.: Automatic evaluation of design alternatives with quantitative argumentation. Argum. Comput. 6(1), 24–49 (2015). http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/19462166.2014.1001791 CrossRefMATH

Bessette, J.: Deliberative democracy: the majority principle in Republican government. How Democr. Const. 102, 109–111 (1980)

Buckingham-Shum, S.: Cohere: towards web 2.0 argumentation. In: Computational Models of Argument: Proceedings of COMMA 2008, Toulouse, France, 28–30 May 2008, pp. 97–108 (2008). http://www.booksonline.iospress.nl/Content/View.aspx?piid=9271

Caminada, M.W.A., Gabbay, D.M.: A logical account of formal argumentation. Studia Log. 93(2–3), 109–145 (2009). http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11225-009-9218-x MathSciNetCrossRefMATH

Cartwright, D., Atkinson, K.: Political engagement through tools for argumentation. In: Computational Models of Argument: Proceedings of COMMA 2008, Toulouse, France, 28–30 May 2008. pp. 116–127 (2008). http://www.booksonline.iospress.nl/Content/View.aspx?piid=9273

Cayrol, C., Lagasquie-Schiex, M.C.: On the acceptability of arguments in bipolar argumentation frameworks. In: Godo, L. (ed.) ECSQARU 2005. LNCS, vol. 3571, pp. 378–389. Springer, Heidelberg (2005). doi:10.1007/11518655_33 CrossRef

Conklin, J., Selvin, A.M., Shum, S.B., Sierhuis, M.: Facilitated hypertext for collective sensemaking: 15 years on from gIBIS. In: Proceedings of the 12th ACM Conference on Hypertext and Hypermedia, pp. 123–124 (2001). http://doi.acm.org/10.1145/504216.504246

Dung, P.M.: On the acceptability of arguments and its fundamental role in nonmonotonic reasoning, logic programming and n-person games. Artif. Intell. 77(2), 321–358 (1995). http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/0004-3702(94)00041-X MathSciNetCrossRefMATH

Dunne, P.E., Hunter, A., McBurney, P., Parsons, S., Wooldridge, M.: Weighted argument systems: basic definitions, algorithms, and complexity results. Artif. Intell. 175(2), 457–486 (2011). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.artint.2010.09.005 MathSciNetCrossRefMATH

10.

Fishkin, J.S., Luskin, R.C., Jowell, R.: Deliberative polling and public consultation. Parliam. Aff. 53(4), 657–666 (2000)CrossRef

11.

Ganzer-Ripoll, J., López-Sánchez, M., Rodriguez-Aguilar, J.A.: A multi-agent argumentation framework to support collective reasoning. In: Aydoğan, R., Baarslag, T., Gerding, E., Jonker, C.M., Julian, V., Sanchez-Anguix, V. (eds.) COREDEMA 2016. LNCS, vol. 10238, pp. 100–117. Springer, Cham (2017). doi:10.1007/978-3-319-57285-7_7 CrossRef

12.

Gordon, T.F., Prakken, H., Walton, D.: The Carneades model of argument and burden of proof. Artif. Intell. 171(10–15), 875–896 (2007). http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.artint.2007.04.010 MathSciNetCrossRefMATH

13.

Gordon, T.F., Richter, G.: Discourse support systems for deliberative democracy. In: Traunmüller, R., Lenk, K. (eds.) EGOV 2002. LNCS, vol. 2456, pp. 248–255. Springer, Heidelberg (2002). doi:10.1007/978-3-540-46138-8_40 CrossRef

14.

Krauthoff, T., Baurmann, M., Betz, G., Mauve, M.: Dialog-based online argumentation. In: Computational Models of Argument - Proceedings of COMMA 2016, Potsdam, Germany, 12–16 September 2016, pp. 33–40 (2016). http://dx.doi.org/10.3233/978-1-61499-686-6-33

15.

Kunz, W., Rittel, H.W.: Issues as Elements of Information Systems, vol. 131. Institute of Urban and Regional Development, University of California Berkeley (1970)

16.

Leite, J., Martins, J.: Social abstract argumentation. In: Proceedings of the 22nd International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence, IJCAI 2011, pp. 2287–2292 (2011). http://ijcai.org/papers11/Papers/IJCAI11-381.pdf

17.

Loukis, E., Xenakis, A., Tseperli, N.: Using argument visualization to enhance e-participation in the legislation formation process. In: Macintosh, A., Tambouris, E. (eds.) ePart 2009. LNCS, vol. 5694, pp. 125–138. Springer, Heidelberg (2009). doi:10.1007/978-3-642-03781-8_12 CrossRef

18.

Luna, G.D.I., López-López, A., Pérez, J.: Predicting preferences of voters from opinion polls by machine learning and game theory. Res. Comput. Sci. 77, 121–131 (2014). http://rcs.cic.ipn.mx/2014_77/Predicting%20Preferences%20of%20Voters%20from%20Opinion%20Polls%20by%20Machine%20Learning%20and%20Game%20Theory.pdf

19.

Mouffe, C.: Deliberative democracy or agonistic pluralism? Soc. Res. 3, 745–758 (1999)

20.

Patkos, T., Bikakis, A., Flouris, G.: A multi-aspect evaluation framework for comments on the social web. In: Principles of Knowledge Representation and Reasoning: Proceedings of the Fifteenth International Conference, KR 2016, Cape Town, South Africa, 25–29 April 2016, pp. 593–596 (2016). http://www.aaai.org/ocs/index.php/KR/KR16/paper/view/12885

21.

Rago, A., Toni, F., Aurisicchio, M., Baroni, P.: Discontinuity-free decision support with quantitative argumentation debates. In: Principles of Knowledge Representation and Reasoning: Proceedings of the Fifteenth International Conference, KR 2016, Cape Town, South Africa, 25–29 April 2016, pp. 63–73 (2016). http://www.aaai.org/ocs/index.php/KR/KR16/paper/view/12874

22.

Simari, G.R., Rahwan, I. (eds.): Argumentation in Artificial Intelligence. Springer, Heidelberg (2009)

23.

Thapen, N.A., Ghanem, M.M.: Towards passive political opinion polling using Twitter. In: Proceedings of the BCS SGAI Workshop on Social Media Analysis 2013 Co-Located with 33rd Annual International Conference of the British Computer Society’s Specialist Group on Artificial Intelligence (BCS SGAI 2013), Cambridge, UK, 10 December 2013, pp. 19–34 (2013). http://ceur-ws.org/Vol-1110/paper2.pdf

24.

Zhu, J., Wang, H., Zhu, M., Tsou, B.K., Ma, M.Y.: Aspect-based opinion polling from customer reviews. IEEE Trans. Affect. Comput. 2(1), 37–49 (2011). http://dx.doi.org/10.1109/T-AFFC.2011.2 CrossRef

Titel: Quantitative Argumentation Debates with Votes for Opinion Polling
verfasst von: Antonio Rago
Francesca Toni
Verlag: Springer International Publishing
Buch: PRIMA 2017: Principles and Practice of Multi-Agent Systems
Print ISBN: 978-3-319-69130-5

Electronic ISBN: 978-3-319-69131-2

Copyright-Jahr: 2017
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-69131-2_22

Springer Professional

Abstract

Bitte loggen Sie sich ein, um Zugang zu Ihrer Lizenz zu erhalten.

Sie haben noch keine Lizenz? Dann Informieren Sie sich jetzt über unsere Produkte:

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik"

Springer Professional "Technik"

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft"