Strategic Argumentation is NP-Complete

TL;DR

This paper proves that determining optimal moves in strategic argumentation dialogue games is NP-complete, highlighting computational complexity challenges in modeling such interactions.

Contribution

The paper models dialogue games within a skeptical, non-monotonic formalism and establishes the NP-completeness of move decision problems.

Findings

Deciding moves in dialogue games is NP-complete.

Modeling dialogue games in a formalism reveals computational hardness.

Highlights complexity challenges in strategic argumentation.

Abstract

In this paper we study the complexity of strategic argumentation for dialogue games. A dialogue game is a 2-player game where the parties play arguments. We show how to model dialogue games in a skeptical, non-monotonic formalism, and we show that the problem of deciding what move (set of rules) to play at each turn is an NP-complete problem.