Axiomatic agent based architecture for agile decision making in strategic information systems

  • Babak Akhgar
  • Esmael Salahi Parvin
  • Mohammad Hussein Sherkat
Original Research


Strategic decisions to be seriously made by strategic information systems (SIS) in uncertain environments are considered as the main concern of organizations to achieve differentiating advantages. Architecting such an SIS in which strategic decisions are made continuously can be well performed by employing an axiomatic design approach by which basic constituents of an agent based SIS are determined. People may decide differently in the same situation not because they are logical but because they sometimes decide emotionally. Here architecting an SIS based on emotional agents which contribute in strategic decision making has been proposed in a model based on axiomatic design theory to consider critical points such as emotional decision making and flexibility which results in agile SIS.


Architectural design Design theory System(s) design Multi agent systems Decision making 


  1. Akhgar B (2004) Strategic information systems, concept to code, vol 4. KAR white paper, UKGoogle Scholar
  2. Cicirello VA (2001) A game-theoretic analysis of multi-agent systems for shop floor routing. The Robotics Institute, Carnegie Mellon University, PittsburghGoogle Scholar
  3. Davis D, Sloman A, Poli R (1995) Simulating agents and their environments. AISB Q 93:34–41Google Scholar
  4. El-Nasr MS., Seif M, Skubic M (1998). A Fuzzy emotional agent for decision-making in a mobile robot. Paper presented at the IEEE International Conference on Fuzzy SystemsGoogle Scholar
  5. El-Nasr MS, Yen J, Ioerger TR (2000) FLAME: fuzzy logic adaptive model of emotions. Auton Agents Multi-Agent Syst 3(3):219–257CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Ferber J (1999) Multi-agent systems. Addison-Wesley, LondonGoogle Scholar
  7. Gmytrasiewicz PJ, Lisetti CL (2002) Emotions and personality in agent design and modeling. Intell Agents VIII Agent Theor Archit Lang 2333:21–31Google Scholar
  8. Jennings NR, Sycara K, Woolridge M (1998) A roadmap of agent research and development. Auton Agent Multi Agent Syst 1:7–38CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Kalenka S, Jennings NR (1997) Socially responsible decision making by autonomous agents. Springer, VerlagGoogle Scholar
  10. Kulak O, Durmusoglu MB, Tufekci S (2005a) A complete cellular manufacturing system design methodology based on axiomatic design principles. Comput Ind Eng 48(4):765–787. doi:10.1016/j.cie.2004.12.006 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Kulak O, Kahraman C, Oztaysi B, Tanyas M (2005b) Multi-attribute information technology project selection using fuzzy axiomatic design. J Enterp Inform Manag 18(3):275–288CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Macas M, Ventura R, Cust′odio L, Pinto-Ferreira C (2001) Experiments with an emotion-based agent using the DARE architecture. Paper presented at the symposium on emotion, cognition and affective computing (AISB’01 Convention), UKGoogle Scholar
  13. Nucci Franco G, Batocchio A (2001) Towards an axiomatic framework to support the design of holonic systems. Paper presented at the database and expert systems applications, 2001. Proceedings 12th International Workshop on database and expertsGoogle Scholar
  14. Peshkin L (2003) Reinforcement learning by policy search. Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Artificial Intelligence Laboratory, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  15. Pinson S, Moraïtis P (1997) An intelligent distributed system for strategic decision making. Group Decis Negot 6(1):77–108CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Shirazi MA, Soroor J (2007) An intelligent agent-based architecture for strategic information system applications. Knowl Based Syst 20(8):726–735CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Sloman A (2004) What are emotion theories about? In: Hudlicka E, Cañamero D (eds) Architectures for modeling emotion: cross-disciplinary foundations. AAAI Spring Symposium Technical Report, pp 128–134Google Scholar
  18. Sloman A, Croucher M (1981) Why robots will have emotions. In: Proceedings of IJCAIGoogle Scholar
  19. Stone P, Veloso M (2000) Multi agent systems: a survey from a machine learning perspective. Auton Robots 8:345–383CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Suh NP (1990) The principles of design. Oxford University Press, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  21. Suh NP (1995) Design and operation of large systems. J Manuf Syst 14(3):203–213CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Suh NP (1997) Design of Systems. CIRP Ann Manuf Technol 46(1):75–80. doi:10.1016/S0007-8506(07)60779-3 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Suh NP (1998) Axiomatic design theory for systems. Res Eng Des Theory Appl Concurr Eng 10(4):189–209Google Scholar
  24. Suh NP (2001) Axiomatic design: advances and applications. Oxford University Press, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  25. Sutton RS, Barto AG (1998) Reinforcement learning I: introduction. MIT, USAGoogle Scholar
  26. Togay C, Sundar G, Dogru AH (2006) Detection of component composition mismatch with axiomatic designGoogle Scholar
  27. Turban E, McLean ER, Wetherbe JC (2001) Information technology for management : making connections for strategic advantage, 2nd edn. Wiley, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  28. Velásquez J (1998) When robots weep: emotional memories and decision-making. In: Proceedings of AAAI-98, Madison, WIGoogle Scholar
  29. Weiss G (1999) Multi agent systems, a modern approach to distributed artificial intelligence. MIT Press, USAGoogle Scholar
  30. Wooldridge M, Jennings NR (1995) Intelligent agent: theory and practice. Knowl Eng Rev 10(2):115–152CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Wurman PR (1999) Market structure and multidimensional auction design for computational economies. PhD Thesis, University of MichiganGoogle Scholar
  32. Wurman PR, Wellman MP, Walsh WE (2001) A parametrization of the auction design space. Games Economic Behav 35(1–2):304–338CrossRefMATHMathSciNetGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag 2012

Authors and Affiliations

  • Babak Akhgar
    • 1
  • Esmael Salahi Parvin
    • 2
  • Mohammad Hussein Sherkat
    • 2
  1. 1.C3RISheffield Hallam UniversitySheffieldUK
  2. 2.Management SchoolUniversity of TehranTehranIran

Personalised recommendations