Value-based Practical Reasoning: Modal Logic + Argumentation

TL;DR

This paper introduces a logic-based framework combining modal logic and argumentation to enable autonomous agents to evaluate and select among conflicting plans based on their impact on values, ensuring goal achievement.

Contribution

It presents a novel integration of modal logic and argumentation for value-based practical reasoning in autonomous planning, addressing plan conflict resolution.

Findings

Framework effectively models plan evaluation based on value promotion/demotion.

Supports reasoning about plan conflicts through argumentation.

Enables agents to select optimal plans for goal achievement.

Abstract

Autonomous agents are supposed to be able to finish tasks or achieve goals that are assigned by their users through performing a sequence of actions. Since there might exist multiple plans that an agent can follow and each plan might promote or demote different values along each action, the agent should be able to resolve the conflicts between them and evaluate which plan he should follow. In this paper, we develop a logic-based framework that combines modal logic and argumentation for value-based practical reasoning with plans. Modal logic is used as a technique to represent and verify whether a plan with its local properties of value promotion or demotion can be followed to achieve an agent's goal. We then propose an argumentation-based approach that allows an agent to reason about his plans in the form of supporting or objecting to a plan using the verification results.