# An approach to Decision Making based on Dynamic Argumentation Systems

## TL;DR

This paper presents a formalism for single-agent decision making using Dynamic Argumentation Frameworks, allowing justification of choices based on current evidence, preferences, and conflicts among alternatives.

## Contribution

It introduces a novel formalism for decision making that integrates argumentation, preferences, and conflicts, along with an algorithm and formal links to classical decision theory.

## Key findings

- Algorithm for decision making based on argumentation formalism
- Formal connection to classical decision theory
- Framework handles preferences and conflicts among options

## Abstract

In this paper, we introduce a formalism for single-agent decision making that is based on Dynamic Argumentation Frameworks. The formalism can be used to justify a choice, which is based on the current situation the agent is involved. Taking advantage of the inference mechanism of the argumentation formalism, it is possible to consider preference relations and conflicts among the available alternatives for that reasoning. With this formalization, given a particular set of evidence, the justified conclusions supported by warranted arguments will be used by the agent's decision rules to determine which alternatives will be selected. We also present an algorithm that implements a choice function based on our formalization. Finally, we complete our presentation by introducing formal results that relate the proposed framework with approaches of classical decision theory.