<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<XML><RECORDS>
<RECORD>
	<REFERENCE_TYPE>3</REFERENCE_TYPE>
	<AUTHORS>
		<AUTHOR>Sindhu Joseph</AUTHOR>
		<AUTHOR>Henry Prakken</AUTHOR>
	</AUTHORS>
	<YEAR>2009</YEAR>
	<TITLE>Coherence-Driven Argumentation to Norm Consensus</TITLE>
	<SECONDARY_TITLE>ICAIL-09 Twelfth International Conference on ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE and LAW</SECONDARY_TITLE>
	<PLACE_PUBLISHED>Barcelona</PLACE_PUBLISHED>
	<KEYWORDS>
		<KEYWORD>deductive</KEYWORD>
		<KEYWORD>coherence,</KEYWORD>
		<KEYWORD>norm</KEYWORD>
		<KEYWORD>deliberation,</KEYWORD>
		<KEYWORD></KEYWORD>
		<KEYWORD>normative</KEYWORD>
		<KEYWORD>agents,</KEYWORD>
		<KEYWORD>argumentation</KEYWORD>
	</KEYWORDS>
	<ABSTRACT>In this paper coherence-based models are proposed as an alternative to logic-based BDI and argumentation models for the reasoning of normative agents. A model is provided for how two coherence-based agents can deliberate on how to regulate a domain of interest. First a deductive coherence model presented, in which the coherence values are derived from the deduction relation of an underlying logic; this makes it possible to identify the reasons for why a proposition is accepted or rejected. Then it is shown how coherence-driven agents can generate candidate norms for deliberation, after which a dialogue protocol for such deliberations is proposed.&Acirc;&nbsp; The resulting model is compared to current logic-based argumentation systems for deliberation over action. 
</ABSTRACT>
</RECORD>
</RECORDS></XML>