Dialectical Reconciliation via Structured Argumentative Dialogues

We present a novel framework designed to extend model reconciliation approaches, commonly used in human-aware planning, for enhanced human-AI interaction. By adopting a structured argumentation-based dialogue paradigm, our framework enables dialectical reconciliation to address knowledge discrepancies between an explainer (AI agent) and an explainee (human user), where the goal is for the explainee to understand the explainer's decision. We formally describe the operational semantics of our proposed framework, providing theoretical guarantees. We then evaluate the framework's efficacy ``in the wild'' via computational and human-subject experiments. Our findings suggest that our framework offers a promising direction for fostering effective human-AI interactions in domains where explainability is important.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Published
2024-10-26
DOI
https://doi.org/10.24963/kr.2024/73
Citations
1
Primary Topic
Conflict Management and Negotiation
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
1.13

Funders

Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Dialectical Reconciliation via Structured Argumentative Dialogues

William Yeoh, Tran Cao Son, Stylianos Loukas Vasileiou, Francesca Toni et al.
1 citations
Conflict Management and Negotiation
1.13
article

Dialectical Reconciliation via Structured Argumentative Dialogues

William Yeoh, Tran Cao Son, Stylianos Loukas Vasileiou, Francesca Toni, Ashwin Kumar
article en
1 citations

Abstract

We present a novel framework designed to extend model reconciliation approaches, commonly used in human-aware planning, for enhanced human-AI interaction. By adopting a structured argumentation-based dialogue paradigm, our framework enables dialectical reconciliation to address knowledge discrepancies between an explainer (AI agent) and an explainee (human user), where the goal is for the explainee to understand the explainer's decision. We formally describe the operational semantics of our proposed framework, providing theoretical guarantees. We then evaluate the framework's efficacy ``in the wild'' via computational and human-subject experiments. Our findings suggest that our framework offers a promising direction for fostering effective human-AI interactions in domains where explainability is important.

New Mexico State University (US), Washington University in St. Louis (US), Imperial College London (GB)
National Science Foundation, Royal Academy of Engineering
Openalex Percentile: Top 16%
Conflict Management and Negotiation
1.13
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.