Solving Power and Trust Conflicts through Argumentation in Agent-mediated Knowledge Distribution
Distributing pieces of knowledge in large, usually distributed organizations is a central problem in Knowledge and Organization management. Policies for distributing knowledge and information are mostly incomplete or in potential conflict with each other. As a consequence, decision processes for inf...
| Autores: | , , |
|---|---|
| Tipo de recurso: | artículo |
| Estado: | Versión publicada |
| Fecha de publicación: | 2006 |
| País: | Argentina |
| Institución: | Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas |
| Repositorio: | CONICET Digital (CONICET) |
| Idioma: | inglés |
| OAI Identifier: | oai:ri.conicet.gov.ar:11336/95861 |
| Acceso en línea: | http://hdl.handle.net/11336/95861 |
| Access Level: | acceso abierto |
| Palabra clave: | DEFEASIBLE ARGUMENTATION KNOWLEDGE MANAGEMENT MULTIAGENT SYSTEMS https://purl.org/becyt/ford/2.2 https://purl.org/becyt/ford/2 |
| Sumario: | Distributing pieces of knowledge in large, usually distributed organizations is a central problem in Knowledge and Organization management. Policies for distributing knowledge and information are mostly incomplete or in potential conflict with each other. As a consequence, decision processes for information distribution may be difficult to formalize on the basis of a rationally justified procedure. This article presents an argumentative approach to cope with this problem based on integrating the JITIK multiagent system with Defeasible Logic Programming (DeLP), a logic programming formalism for defeasible argumentation. We show how power relations, as well as delegation and trust, can be embedded within our framework in terms of DeLP, in such a way that a dialectical argumentation process works as a decision core. Conflicts among policies are solved on the basis of a dialectical analysis whose outcome determines to which specific users different pieces of knowledge are to be delivered. |
|---|