Skip to content

Research at St Andrews

Dialectical models of deliberation, problem solving and decision making

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

Author(s)

Douglas Walton, Alice Toniolo, Timothy J. Norman

School/Research organisations

Abstract

Hamblin distinguished between formal and descriptive dialectic. Formal normative models of deliberation dialogue have been strongly emphasized as argumentation frameworks in computer science. But making such models of deliberation applicable to real natural language examples has reached a point where the descriptive aspect needs more interdisciplinary work. The new formal and computational models of deliberation dialogue that are being built in computer science seem to be closely related to some already existing and very well established computing technologies such as problem solving and decision making, but whether or how dialectical argumentation can be helpful to support these systems remains an open question. The aim of this paper is to examine some real examples of argumentation that seem to hover on the borderlines between deliberation, problem solving and decision making.

Close

Details

Original languageEnglish
JournalArgumentation
VolumeFirst Online
Early online date13 Sep 2019
DOIs
Publication statusE-pub ahead of print - 13 Sep 2019

    Research areas

  • Changing the issue, Computational models, Deliberation dialogue, Typology of deliberation

Discover related content
Find related publications, people, projects and more using interactive charts.

View graph of relations

Related by author

  1. Argumentation-based explanations of multimorbidity treatment plans

    Shaheen, Q., Toniolo, A. & Kuster Filipe Bowles, J., 2021, PRIMA 2020: Principles and Practice of Multi-Agent Systems: 23rd International Conference, Nagoya, Japan, November 18–20, 2020, Proceedings. Uchiya, T., Bai, Q. & Maestre, I. M. (eds.). Cham: Springer, p. 394-402 9 p. (Lecture Notes in Computer Science (including subseries Lecture Notes in Artificial Intelligence and Lecture Notes in Bioinformatics); vol. 12568 LNCS).

    Research output: Chapter in Book/Report/Conference proceedingConference contribution

  2. Responsible agent deliberation

    Walton, D. & Toniolo, A., 1 Jun 2020, Reason to Dissent: Proceedings of the 3rd European Conference on Argumentation, Volume . Novaes, C. D., Jansen, H., van Laar, J. A. & Verheij, B. (eds.). College Publications, p. 391-405 15 p.

    Research output: Chapter in Book/Report/Conference proceedingConference contribution

  3. Dialogue games for explaining medication choices

    Shaheen, Q., Toniolo, A. & Kuster Filipe Bowles, J., 2020, Rules and Reasoning: 4th International Joint Conference, RuleML+RR 2020, Oslo, Norway, June 29–July 1, 2020, Proceedings. Gutiérrez Basulto, V., Kliegr, T., Soylu, A., Giese, M. & Roman, D. (eds.). Cham: Springer, p. 97-111 15 p. (Lecture Notes in Computer Science (Programming and Software Engineering); vol. 12173 LNCS).

    Research output: Chapter in Book/Report/Conference proceedingConference contribution

  4. On natural language generation of formal argumentation

    Cerutti, F., Toniolo, A. & Norman, T. J., 27 Dec 2019, Proceedings of the 3rd Workshop on Advances In Argumentation In Artificial Intelligence co-located with the 18th International Conference of the Italian Association for Artificial Intelligence (AI*IA 2019): Rende, Italy, November 19-22, 2019. Santini, F. & Toniolo, A. (eds.). Sun SITE Central Europe, p. 15-29 15 p. (CEUR Workshop Proceedings; vol. 2528).

    Research output: Chapter in Book/Report/Conference proceedingConference contribution

  5. Deb8: a tool for collaborative analysis of video

    Carneiro, G., Nacenta, M., Toniolo, A., Mendez, G. & Quigley, A. J., 4 Jun 2019, Proceedings of the 2019 ACM International Conference on Interactive Experiences for TV and Online Video (TVX '19). ACM, p. 47-58

    Research output: Chapter in Book/Report/Conference proceedingConference contribution

ID: 265773483

Top