The aim of this article is to propose a model for the measurement of the strength of rhetorical arguments (i.e., threats, rewards, and appeals), which are used in persuasive negotiation dialogues when a proponent agent tries to convince his opponent to accept a proposal. Related articles propose a calculation based on the components of the rhetorical arguments, that is, the importance of the goal of the opponent and the certainty level of the beliefs that make up the argument. Our proposed model is based on the pre-conditions of credibility and preferability stated by Guerini and Castelfranchi. Thus, we suggest the use of two new criteria for the strength calculation: the credibility of the proponent and the status of the goal of the opponent in the goal processing cycle. We use three scenarios in order to illustrate our proposal. Besides, the model is empirically evaluated and the results demonstrate that the proposed model is more efficient than previous works of the state of the art in terms of numbers of negotiation cycles, number of exchanged arguments, and number of reached agreements.

中文翻译：

---

在有说服力的谈判对话中衡量威胁、奖励和吸引力的强度

本文的目的是提出一个模型来衡量修辞论证（即威胁、奖励和上诉）的强度，当支持者试图说服他的对手接受提议时，这些模型被用于有说服力的谈判对话中. 相关文章提出了基于修辞论证的组成部分的计算，即对手目标的重要性和构成论证的信念的确定性水平。我们提出的模型是基于 Guerini 和 Castelfranchi 提出的可信度和可取性的前提条件。因此，我们建议使用两个新的强度计算标准：支持者的可信度和对手在目标处理周期中的目标状态。我们使用三个场景来说明我们的建议。除了，