Argumentative Human-AI Decision-Making: Toward AI Agents That Reason With Us, Not For Us
Fuente:
arXiv
Enregistré dans:
| Auteurs principaux: | , , , |
|---|---|
| Format: | Preprint |
| Publié: |
2026
|
| Sujets: | |
| Accès en ligne: | |
| Tags: |
Ajouter un tag
Pas de tags, Soyez le premier à ajouter un tag!
|
| _version_ | 1866915868241297408 |
|---|---|
| author | Vasileiou, Stylianos Loukas Rago, Antonio Toni, Francesca Yeoh, William |
| author_facet | Vasileiou, Stylianos Loukas Rago, Antonio Toni, Francesca Yeoh, William |
| contents | Computational argumentation offers formal frameworks for transparent, verifiable reasoning but has traditionally been limited by its reliance on domain-specific information and extensive feature engineering. In contrast, LLMs excel at processing unstructured text, yet their opaque nature makes their reasoning difficult to evaluate and trust. We argue that the convergence of these fields will lay the foundation for a new paradigm: Argumentative Human-AI Decision-Making. We analyze how the synergy of argumentation framework mining, argumentation framework synthesis, and argumentative reasoning enables agents that do not just justify decisions, but engage in dialectical processes where decisions are contestable and revisable -- reasoning with humans rather than for them. This convergence of computational argumentation and LLMs is essential for human-aware, trustworthy AI in high-stakes domains. |
| format | Preprint |
| id |
arxiv_https___arxiv_org_abs_2603_15946 |
| institution | arXiv |
| publishDate | 2026 |
| record_format | arxiv |
| spellingShingle | Argumentative Human-AI Decision-Making: Toward AI Agents That Reason With Us, Not For Us Vasileiou, Stylianos Loukas Rago, Antonio Toni, Francesca Yeoh, William Artificial Intelligence Computational argumentation offers formal frameworks for transparent, verifiable reasoning but has traditionally been limited by its reliance on domain-specific information and extensive feature engineering. In contrast, LLMs excel at processing unstructured text, yet their opaque nature makes their reasoning difficult to evaluate and trust. We argue that the convergence of these fields will lay the foundation for a new paradigm: Argumentative Human-AI Decision-Making. We analyze how the synergy of argumentation framework mining, argumentation framework synthesis, and argumentative reasoning enables agents that do not just justify decisions, but engage in dialectical processes where decisions are contestable and revisable -- reasoning with humans rather than for them. This convergence of computational argumentation and LLMs is essential for human-aware, trustworthy AI in high-stakes domains. |
| title | Argumentative Human-AI Decision-Making: Toward AI Agents That Reason With Us, Not For Us |
| topic | Artificial Intelligence |
| url | https://arxiv.org/abs/2603.15946 |