Classification and strategical issues of argumentation games on structured argumentation frameworks

This paper aims at giving a classification of argumentation games agents play within a multi-agent setting. We investigate different scenarios of such argumentation games that differ in the protocol used for argumentation, i.e. direct, synchronous, and dialectical argumentation protocols, the awareness that agents have on other agents beliefs, and different settings for the preferences of agents. To this end we employ structured argumentation frameworks, which are an extension to Dung's abstract argumentation frameworks that give a simple inner structure to arguments. We also provide some game theoretical results that characterize a specific argumentation game as strategy-proof and develop some argumentation selection strategies that turn out to be the dominant strategies for other specific argumentation games.