Argumentation-based multi-agent distributed reasoning in dynamic and open environments

This work presents an approach for distributed and contextualized reasoning in multi-agent systems, considering environments in which agents may have incomplete, uncertain and inconsistent knowledge. Knowledge is represented by defeasible logic with mapping rules, which model the capability of agents to acquire knowledge from other agents during reasoning. Based on such knowledge representation, an argumentation-based reasoning model that enables distributed building of reusable argument structures to support conclusions is proposed. Conflicts between arguments are resolved by an argument strength calculation that considers the trust among agents and the degree of similarity between knowledge of different agents, based on the intuition that greater similarity between knowledge defined by different agents implies in less uncertainty about the validity of the built argument. Contextualized reasoning is supported through sharing of relevant knowledge by an agent when issuing queries to other agents, which enable the cooperating agents to be aware of knowledge not known a priori but that is important to reach a reasonable conclusion given the context of the agent that issued the query. A distributed algorithm is presented and analytically and experimentally evaluated asserting its computational feasibility. Finally, our approach is compared to related work, highlighting the contributions presented, demonstrating its applicability in a broader range of scenarios, and presenting perspectives for future work.