Calculating the strength of rhetorical arguments in persuasive negotiation dialogues

<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><modsCollection xmlns="http://www.loc.gov/mods/v3" xmlns:xsi="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema-instance" xsi:schemaLocation="http://www.loc.gov/mods/v3 http://www.loc.gov/standards/mods/v3/mods-3-8.xsd">
<mods version="3.8">
<titleInfo>
<title>Calculating the strength of rhetorical arguments in persuasive negotiation dialogues</title>
</titleInfo>
<name type="personal" usage="primary" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink" xlink:href="MAPA20210005619">
<namePart>Morveli-Espinoza, Mariela</namePart>
<nameIdentifier>MAPA20210005619</nameIdentifier>
</name>
<typeOfResource>text</typeOfResource>
<genre authority="marcgt">periodical</genre>
<originInfo>
<place>
<placeTerm type="code" authority="marccountry">esp</placeTerm>
</place>
<dateIssued encoding="marc">2021</dateIssued>
<issuance>serial</issuance>
</originInfo>
<language>
<languageTerm type="code" authority="iso639-2b">spa</languageTerm>
</language>
<physicalDescription>
<form authority="marcform">print</form>
<internetMediaType>application/pdf</internetMediaType>
</physicalDescription>
<abstract displayLabel="Summary">Rhetorical arguments are used in negotiation dialogues when a proponent agent tries to persuade his opponent to accept a proposal more readily. When more than one argument is generated, the proponent must compare them in order to select the most adequate for his interests. A way of comparing them is by means of their strength values. Related work propose a calculation based only on the components of the rhetorical arguments, i.e., the importance of the opponent's goal and the certainty level of the beliefs that make up the argument. This work aims to propose a model for the calculation of the strength of rhetorical arguments, which is inspired on the pre-conditions of credibility and preferability stated by Guerini and astelfranchi. Thus, we suggest the use of two new criteria to the strength calculation: the credibility of the proponent and the status of the opponent's goal in the goal processing cycle. The model is impirically evaluated and the results demonstrate that the proposed model is more ecient than previous works in terms of number of exchanged arguments and number of reached agreements. </abstract>
<note type="statement of responsibility">Mariela Morveli-Espinoza</note>
<subject xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink" xlink:href="MAPA20080611200">
<topic>Inteligencia artificial</topic>
</subject>
<subject xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink" xlink:href="MAPA20080660772">
<topic>Continuidad de negocio</topic>
</subject>
<subject xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink" xlink:href="MAPA20080586454">
<topic>Modelos analíticos</topic>
</subject>
<classification authority="">922.134</classification>
<relatedItem type="host">
<titleInfo>
<title>Revista Iberoamericana de Inteligencia Artificial</title>
</titleInfo>
<originInfo>
<publisher>IBERAMIA, Sociedad Iberoamericana de Inteligencia Artificial , 2018-</publisher>
</originInfo>
<identifier type="issn">1988-3064</identifier>
<identifier type="local">MAP20200034445</identifier>
<part>
<text>15/02/2021 Volumen 24 Número 67 - febrero 2021 , p. 36-39</text>
</part>
</relatedItem>
<recordInfo>
<recordContentSource authority="marcorg">MAP</recordContentSource>
<recordCreationDate encoding="marc">210413</recordCreationDate>
<recordChangeDate encoding="iso8601">20220911190023.0</recordChangeDate>
<recordIdentifier source="MAP">MAP20210011733</recordIdentifier>
<languageOfCataloging>
<languageTerm type="code" authority="iso639-2b">spa</languageTerm>
</languageOfCataloging>
</recordInfo>
</mods>
</modsCollection>