- document
- Visser, W. (author), Aydogan, R. (author), Hindriks, K.V. (author), Jonker, C.M. (author) conference paper 2012
- document
-
Visser, W.M. (author), Hindriks, K.V. (author), Jonker, C.M. (author)In the context of practical reasoning, such as decision making and negotiation, it is necessary to model preferences over possible outcomes. Such preferences usually depend on multiple criteria. We argue that the criteria by which outcomes are evaluated should be the satisfaction of a person’s underlying interests: the more an outcome satisfies...conference paper 2011
- document
-
Visser, W.M. (author), Hindriks, K.V. (author), Jonker, C.M. (author)Preferences are derived in part from knowledge. Knowledge, however, may be defeasible. We present an argumentation framework for deriving qualitative, multi-attribute preferences and incorporate defeasible reasoning about knowledge. Intuitively, preferences based on defeasible conclusions are not as strong as preferences based on certain...conference paper 2011
- document
-
Visser, W. (author), Hindriks, K.V. (author), Jonker, C.M. (author)This paper presents an argumentation-based framework for the modelling of, and automated reasoning about multi-attribute preferences of a qualitative nature. The framework presents preferences according to the lexicographic ordering that is well-understood by humans. Preferences are derived in part from knowledge. Knowledge, however, may be...journal article 2011
- document
-
Visser, W.M. (author), Hindriks, K.V. (author), Jonker, C.M. (author)Preferences are derived in part from knowledge. Knowledge, however, may be defeasible. We present an argumentation framework for deriving qualitative, multi-attribute preferences and incorporate defeasible reasoning about knowledge. Intuitively, preferences based on defeasible conclusions are not as strong as preferences based on certain...conference paper 2011
- document
- Hindriks, K.V. (author), Jonker, C.M. (author), Visser, W. (author) conference paper 2009