CBR and Argument Schemes for Collaborative Decision Making

In this paper we present a novel approach for combining Case-Based Reasoning (CBR) and Argumentation. This approach involves 1) the use of CBR for evaluating the arguments submitted by agents in collaborative decision making dialogs, and 2) the use of Argument Schemes and Critical Questions to organize the CBR memory space. The former involves use of past cases to resolve conflicts among newly submitted arguments by assigning them a strength, and possibly submitting additional arguments deemed relevant in similar past deliberations. The latter enables use of agents' submitted arguments instantiating Argument Schemes and Critical Questions, to assess the similarity among cases. Hence, a case is simply defined as a placeholder for the available data related to an experience, and it is the submitted arguments associated with each experience that provide means for comparing cases. This use of CBR and argumentation is formulated with the ProCLAIM model, which features a Mediator Agent...

• Type: Conference
• Year: 2006
• Where: COMMA
• Authors: Pancho Tolchinsky, Sanjay Modgil, Ulises Cortés, Miquel Sànchez-Marrè
• Keywords: Argument Schemes, Case-based Reasoning, COMMA 2006, COMMA 2008, Submitted Arguments