Argumentation Dialogues for Two-Agent Conflict Resolution

We present a method for (two) agents to resolve conflicts amongst themselves, when these conflicts arise from the agents suggesting different realizations of the same goal. The method uses generalpurpose dialogues to allow agents to exchange views. These are in the form of rules, assumptions and contraries of assumptions, in the format underlying Assumption-Based Argumentation (ABA). Thus, the dialogues amount to conducting an argumentation process in ABA. We define successful dialogues as those giving admissible sets of arguments and prove that these successful dialogues resolve conflicts. Thus, we provide a fully distributed, argumentation-based solution to conflict resolution while at the same time linking the computation of a well-known argumentation semantics and two-agent conflict resolution.