Explanation through argumentation

Elizabeth I. Sklar, Mohammad Q. Azhar

Research output: Chapter in Book/Report/Conference proceedingConference paperpeer-review

27 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Computational Argumentation is a logical model of reasoning that has its origins in philosophy and provides a means for organising evidence for (or against) particular claims (or decisions). Argumentation-based Dialogue is a related methodology that is used for structuring interactions between two (or more) agents and has been explored within the Multi-Agent Systems community as an extended form of negotiation where agents can not only exchange claims, but also their reasons for believing (or disbelieving) those claims. Recently, the Artificial Intelligence (AI) community has become intrigued by the notion of “Explainable AI”, in which intelligent systems are able to explain predictions or decisions to (human) users. There is a natural pairing between Explainable AI and Argumentation: the first requires the need to clarify and defend decisions and the second provides a method for linking any decision to the evidence supporting it. In this paper, we describe how the two are connected and illustrate the utility of argumentation-based dialogue as a technique for implementing Explainable AI in a human-robot system.

Original languageEnglish
Title of host publicationHAI 2018 - Proceedings of the 6th International Conference on Human-Agent Interaction
PublisherAssociation for Computing Machinery, Inc
Pages277-285
Number of pages9
ISBN (Electronic)9781450359535
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 4 Dec 2018
Event6th International Conference on Human-Agent Interaction, HAI 2018 - Southampton, United Kingdom
Duration: 15 Dec 201818 Dec 2018

Conference

Conference6th International Conference on Human-Agent Interaction, HAI 2018
Country/TerritoryUnited Kingdom
CitySouthampton
Period15/12/201818/12/2018

Keywords

  • Computational argumentation
  • Explainable AI
  • Human-robot interaction

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'Explanation through argumentation'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this