Tutorial 1 (Monday 13:30-15:00)
Michael Thielscher: KR Techniques for General Game Playing
Abstract:
A General Game Player is a program that accepts formal descriptions of
arbitrary games and plays these games without human intervention. One of the
grand challenges for Artificial Intelligence, General Game Playing requires
to combine techniques from a wide range of areas including knowledge
representation, automated reasoning, heuristic search, planning, and
learning. This tutorial will focus on the challenges for Knowledge
Representation and Reasoning raised by General Game Playing:
Formalizing game rules
Mapping game descriptions to efficient representations
Extracting knowledge from game descritions
Proving properties of games
Tutorial 2 (Monday 15:30-17:00)
Tony Hunter: Argumentation Systems
Abstract:
Argumentation systems are being developed with the aim of reflecting how
human argumentation uses conflicting information to construct and
analyse arguments. Argumentation involves identifying arguments and
counterarguments relevant to an issue (e.g. What are the pros and cons
for the safety of mobile phones for children?). Argumentation may also
involve weighing, comparing, or evaluating arguments (e.g. What sense
can we make of the arguments concerning mobile phones for children?) and
it may involve drawing conclusions (e.g. A parent answering the question
"Are mobile phones safe for my children?"). In addition, argumentation
may involve convincing an audience (e.g. A politician making the case
that mobile phones should be banned for children because the risk of
radiation damage is too great). Formalizations of argumentation have
been extensively studied, and some basic principles have been
established. In Abstract argumentation, originally proposed in the
seminal work by Dung, arguments are treated as atomic, and a graph-based
formalization is used where each node is an argument, and each arc
denotes one argument attacking another argument. In contrast,
logic-based formalizations assume a set of formulae and then
exhaustively lay out arguments and counterarguments, where a
counterargument either rebuts (i.e. negates the claim of the argument)
or undercuts (i.e. negates the support of the argument). In the
logic-based approach, an argument is normally defined as a pair (X,p)
where X is a minimal consistent subset of the knowledgebase that entails
p. A variety of underlying logics have been considered for the
entailment and consistency conditions including classical logic,
defeasible logics, and description logics. Both the graph-based and
logic-based approaches provide principled ways of determining which
arguments are warranted (i.e. undefeated). Recent topics of research in
argumentation systems include the development of algorithms and
implementations, the formalization of rhetorical aspects of
argumentation, and the formalization of argument-based dialogue systems.
In this tutorial, we will consider both graph-based and logic-based
formalizations of argumentation, introducing some of the basic concepts,
and reviewing a range of proposals and results.