Reasoning Alignment For Agentic Ai:Argumentation, Belief Revision, And Dialogue

Agentic AI-deployed as technical systems that perceive, decide, and act via tools-faces requirements of safety, accountability, controlled adaptivity, and compositionality. We develop Reasoning Alignment Diagrams (RADs), commutative reasoning representations that align a source specification with an argumentation-based explanation route. As illustrative examples, we first show that full-meet belief base revision admits an exact representation within base argumentation via a restricted-attack construction: the revised base equals the intersection of the premises appearing in all stable extensions of the modified framework. This yields a RAD from input to sanctioned output that doubles as an explanation engine. We then compose the "listen" (revision) and "assert" (inference) RADs to model dialogue among agents, enabling explainable and auditable autonomy. Although our results are entirely symbolic, the RAD template can serve as a specification layer even when other components are opaque or learned. The approach realizes core themes of Gabbay's programme-logic as a toolbox, combining logics, and argumentation as a host formalism-and supports a principle-based analysis of correctness, transparency, and modularity.

Authors

Publication Details

Journal
Research Publications (Maastricht University)
Published
2025-10-01
Primary Topic
Multi-Agent Systems and Negotiation
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Reasoning Alignment For Agentic Ai:Argumentation, Belief Revision, And Dialogue

Tjitze Rienstra, Liuwen Yu, Leendert Van der Torre
Research Publications (Maastricht University)
Multi-Agent Systems and Negotiation
article

Reasoning Alignment For Agentic Ai:Argumentation, Belief Revision, And Dialogue

Tjitze Rienstra, Liuwen Yu, Leendert Van der Torre
article en

Abstract

Agentic AI-deployed as technical systems that perceive, decide, and act via tools-faces requirements of safety, accountability, controlled adaptivity, and compositionality. We develop Reasoning Alignment Diagrams (RADs), commutative reasoning representations that align a source specification with an argumentation-based explanation route. As illustrative examples, we first show that full-meet belief base revision admits an exact representation within base argumentation via a restricted-attack construction: the revised base equals the intersection of the premises appearing in all stable extensions of the modified framework. This yields a RAD from input to sanctioned output that doubles as an explanation engine. We then compose the "listen" (revision) and "assert" (inference) RADs to model dialogue among agents, enabling explainable and auditable autonomy. Although our results are entirely symbolic, the RAD template can serve as a specification layer even when other components are opaque or learned. The approach realizes core themes of Gabbay's programme-logic as a toolbox, combining logics, and argumentation as a host formalism-and supports a principle-based analysis of correctness, transparency, and modularity.

Research Publications (Maastricht University)
Peace, Justice and strong institutions
Openalex Percentile: Top 19%
Multi-Agent Systems and Negotiation
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.