• français
    • English
  • English 
    • français
    • English
  • Login
JavaScript is disabled for your browser. Some features of this site may not work without it.
BIRD Home

Browse

This CollectionBy Issue DateAuthorsTitlesSubjectsJournals BIRDResearch centres & CollectionsBy Issue DateAuthorsTitlesSubjectsJournals

My Account

Login

Statistics

View Usage Statistics

Pareto optimality and strategy-proofness in group argument evaluation

Thumbnail
View/Open
Pareto_optimaly.pdf (756.5Kb)
Date
2017
Dewey
Intelligence artificielle
Sujet
Argumentation; Strategy-proofness; Pareto optimality; Judgment aggregation
Journal issue
Journal of logic and computation
Volume
27
Number
8
Publication date
2017
Article pages
2581–2609
Publisher
Oxford University Press
DOI
http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/logcom/exx017
URI
https://basepub.dauphine.fr/handle/123456789/16508
Collections
  • LAMSADE : Publications
Metadata
Show full item record
Author
Awad, Edmond
Caminada, Martin
Pigozzi, Gabriella
Podlaszewski, Mikolaj
Rahwan, Iyad
Type
Article accepté pour publication ou publié
Abstract (EN)
An inconsistent knowledge base can be abstracted as a set of arguments and a defeat relation among them. There can be more than one consistent way to evaluate such an argumentation graph. Collective argument evaluation is the problem of aggregating the opinions of multiple agents on how a given set of arguments should be evaluated. It is crucial not only to ensure that the outcome is logically consistent, but also satisfies measures of social optimality and immunity to strategic manipulation. This is because agents have their individual preferences about what the outcome ought to be. In the current paper, we analyze three previously introduced argument-based aggregation operators with respect to Pareto optimality and strategy proofness under different general classes of agent preferences. We highlight fundamental trade-offs between strategic manipulability and social optimality on one hand, and classical logical criteria on the other. Our results motivate further investigation into the relationship between social choice and argumentation theory. The results are also relevant for choosing an appropriate aggregation operator given the criteria that are considered more important, as well as the nature of agents' preferences

  • Accueil Bibliothèque
  • Site de l'Université Paris-Dauphine
  • Contact
SCD Paris Dauphine - Place du Maréchal de Lattre de Tassigny 75775 Paris Cedex 16

 Content on this site is licensed under a Creative Commons 2.0 France (CC BY-NC-ND 2.0) license.