this is a school project on argumentation systems, where the goal is to implement a solver to pick the right expert that makes a debate uncontroversial. The paper can be found here
Agents contributing to (online) debate systems often have different areas of expertise. This must be considered if we want to define a decision making process based on the output of such a system. Distinguishing agents on the basis of their areas of expertise also opens an interesting perspective: when a debate is deemed 'controversial', calling an additional expert may be a natural way to make the decision easier. We introduce possible definitions that capture these notions and we provide a preliminary analysis with the objective to help a designer find the 'right' expert.
main.py [-h] --data FILENAME [--verbose] [--output [OUTPUT_PATH]]
optional arguments:
-h, --help show this help message and exit
--verbose, -v show the 'WAS table' and detailed prints
--output [OUTPUT_PATH], -o [OUTPUT_PATH]
the directory of the file where the result is stored,
default is the current path
required arguments:
--data FILENAME, -d FILENAME
the path to the schema json file
The schema of the argumentation system is stored is a JSON file with the following tree:
"experts" : {
"expert_name" : {
"arguments" : {
"argument_name" : {
"attacks" : ,
"top"
}
},
"votes" : {
"vote_index" : {
"argument" : ,
"target" : ,
"polarity"
}
}
}
}
@inproceedings{inproceedings,
author = {Kontarinis, Dionysios and Bonzon, Elise and Maudet, Nicolas and Moraitis, Pavlos},
year = {2012},
month = {09},
pages = {486-497},
title = {Picking the Right Expert to Make a Debate Uncontroversial},
volume = {245},
journal = {Frontiers in Artificial Intelligence and Applications},
doi = {10.3233/978-1-61499-111-3-486}
}
- Refactor the project into folders.
- Adding natural text parser.
- Create a GUI.