Abstract
Members of a heterogeneous team of autonomous agents may have conflicting opinions about what is the best course of action to adopt. For effective teamwork, mechanisms that enable agreements to be reached regarding a shared plan are essential. We propose a model of arguments based on argumentation schemes that can be used in team deliberative dialogues focussed on establishing such agreements. We explore conflict situations where some actions may be temporally incompatible with existing commitments or may conflict with norms. This model facilitates the exchange of information about plans for agents with different objectives and norms in order to achieve more favourable agreements.
| Original language | English |
|---|---|
| Publication status | Published - 2011 |