arXiv AI

Adaptive Arena-based Contestable Argumentative Network-of-Experts for Open-Ended Care Plan Coordination

arXiv:2608. 05391v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Care plan coordination demands synthesizing heterogeneous clinical, functional, and psychosocial information across multiple professional disciplines, where monolithic LLM pipelines cannot perform in a transparent or safe manner.

arXiv AI
Aug 6

CoPlan: A Trustworthy Co-Intelligence Interface for Care Planning through Role-Based Contestable Argument Graphs

arXiv:2608. 05107v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: AI-supported care planning can help clinicians, patients, caregivers, and care teams coordinate complex decisions across clinical, functional, psychosocial, and environmental needs.

By Hung Truong Thanh Nguyen, H\'el\`ene Fournier, Piper Jackson, Makoto Itoh, Shannon Freeman, Rene Richard, Hung Cao
arXiv AI
6d ago

OmouAI: Argumentative Human-AI Policy Deliberation with Simulated Personas

OmouAI is an interactive deliberation system that combines large language models with computational argumentation to facilitate policy debates involving humans and simulated personas such as stakeholders, experts, or devil’s advocates. Each persona generates its own arguments, which are assembled into a shared argumentation framework that users can contest, add to, or revise, ensuring human oversight. The system evaluates arguments using deterministic argumentative semantics against external goals like the UN Sustainable Development Goals, providing faithful explanations and indicating how policy recommendations affect those goals.

By Stylianos Loukas Vasileiou, Antonio Rago, William Yeoh, Georgina Curto
arXiv Machine Learning
Jun 4

VentAgent: When LLMs Learn to Breathe -- Multi-Objective Arbitration for ARDS Ventilation

arXiv:2606. 04632v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Mechanical ventilation for Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome (ARDS) requires balancing competing physiological goals, including oxygenation, lung protection, and acid-base homeostasis.

By Teqi Hao, Yuxuan Fu, Xiaoyu Tan, Shaojie Shi, Bohao Lv, Yinghui Xu, Xihe Qiu
arXiv AI
Aug 20

A Theory of Post-hoc Debate Judgement

The paper proposes a theory for judging post-hoc debates in AI, focusing on properties like reproducibility, robustness, groundedness, and explainability. It evaluates two debate‑judgement methods—LLM judges and formal computational argumentation semantics—finding similar accuracy but noting that argumentation semantics offers stronger formal guarantees. The study suggests that argumentation semantics is a preferable framework for principled debate judges in AI systems.

By Xiang Yin, Adam Dejl, Antonio Rago, Lihu Chen, Francesca Toni