Auteurs :  Spanoudakis N., Kakas A.C., Moraitis P.
Publication :  In: Aydoğan R., Baarslag T., Gerding E., Jonker C., Julian V., Sanchez-Anguix V. (eds), Conflict Resolution in Decision Making, COREDEMA 2016, Post-Proceedings, Lecture Notes in Artificial Intelligence (LNAI), vol. 10238, Springer, Cham, 2017, pp. pp 82-99

This paper studies the application of argumentation theory and methods from Artificial Intelligence to the problem of conflict resolution. It shows how the decision theories of each of the parties involved in a conflict can be captured and formalized within a framework of preference-based argumentation. In particular, it studies how the SoDA methodology and its support tool, Gorgias-B for developing argumentation software, facilitate the elucidation of each party’s preferences over their available options for addressing the conflict, and, through this, the construction of appropriate argumentation theories corresponding to the decision theories of the parties involved. These argumentation theories are generated automatically and can be executed directly to find out the position of each party at any particular stage of the negotiation process. This connection between argumentation and conflict resolution is illustrated through a real-life example of conflict resolution between the US and China after a plane collision.