Modelling Argumentation and Belief Revision in Agent Interactions

We describe a model for resolution of belief conflicts by argumentation in agent interactions, based on aspects of dialogic logic, speech act theory and belief systems research. This is part of a long term project on the relations between argumentation and cognitive change in collaborative problemsolving interactions. A set of communicative acts for argumentative interaction is defined, based on viewing them as multifunctional with respect to argumentation and interaction control. We concentrate on defining different intraand inter-personal conflict situations, in terms of agents' mental states, and specify the communicative acts that are relevant within each of them. An illustrative example of an argumentation sequence is presented and discussed in relation to the model. Our main claims are that the dialectical and rhetorical dimensions of argumentation need to be situated within a more general interactional framework, and that resolution of belief conflicts can give rise to increased coherence in agents' epistemic states.