Arguing for Decisions: A Qualitative Model of Decision Making

TL;DR

This paper introduces a qualitative decision-making model that explains how people make simple decisions and can be implemented in computer programs, emphasizing transparency and ease of understanding.

Contribution

It presents a new rule-based language and semantics for decision making that balances simplicity and expressiveness, filling gaps left by existing complex models.

Findings

The model effectively describes simple human decision processes.

It offers a transparent decision procedure with interacting reasons.

Applicable for decision scenarios requiring explainability.

Abstract

We develop a qualitative model of decision making with two aims: to describe how people make simple decisions and to enable computer programs to do the same. Current approaches based on Planning or Decisions Theory either ignore uncertainty and tradeoffs, or provide languages and algorithms that are too complex for this task. The proposed model provides a language based on rules, a semantics based on high probabilities and lexicographical preferences, and a transparent decision procedure where reasons for and against decisions interact. The model is no substitude for Decision Theory, yet for decisions that people find easy to explain it may provide an appealing alternative.