King's College London

Research portal

A computational model of argumentation schemes for multi-agent systems

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

Alison R. Panisson, Peter McBurney, Rafael H. Bordini

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)357--395
Number of pages39
JournalArgument & Computation
Issue number3
Published24 Nov 2021

Bibliographical note

Funding Information: The authors dedicate this work to the memory of Professor Douglas Walton. Alison had the pleasure to meet Professor Douglas Walton in person during COMMA 2018. During one of Alison’s presentations during that conference, Professor Walton asked a question, concluding his speech with a compliment, saying that our approach to knowledge representation for argumentation schemes was “elegant”. That was an unforgettable moment for Alison, considering Alison’s great admiration of Walton’s work and as a person. Also, it was that comment (and further discussion during that conference) that motivated us to pursue many of the directions taken in this work. Rafael Bordini and Alison Panisson gratefully acknowledge partial funding from CNPq and CAPES. Publisher Copyright: © 2021-The authors. Published by IOS Press.

King's Authors


There are many benefits of using argumentation-based techniques in multi-agent systems, as clearly shown in the literature. Such benefits come not only from the expressiveness that argumentation-based techniques bring to agent communication but also from the reasoning and decision-making capabilities under conditions of conflicting and uncertain information that argumentation enables for autonomous agents. When developing multi-agent applications in which argumentation will be used to improve agent communication and reasoning, argumentation schemes (reasoning patterns for argumentation) are useful in addressing the requirements of the application domain in regards to argumentation (e.g., defining the scope in which argumentation will be used by agents in that particular application). In this work, we propose an argumentation framework that takes into account the particular structure of argumentation schemes at its core. This paper formally defines such a framework and experimentally evaluates its implementation for both argumentation-based reasoning and dialogues.

View graph of relations

© 2020 King's College London | Strand | London WC2R 2LS | England | United Kingdom | Tel +44 (0)20 7836 5454