Artificial Intelligence Review

, Volume 43, Issue 2, pp 229–242 | Cite as

A review on dependence graph in social reasoning mechanism

  • Billy Pik Lik Lau
  • Ashutosh Kumar Singh
  • Terence Peng Lian Tan
Article

Abstract

Dependence between heterogeneous agents has gained attention from researchers because dependence influences the capabilities of a particular agent in a multi-agent system. In this paper, we have reviewed and discussed the dependence graph which is also known as interdependence graph in some author’s work. Dependence graph is originally proposed in the social reasoning mechanism to visualize the dependence network. In this paper, dependence network is explained and an in depth analysis of the dependence graph is presented as well. Next, we are going to discuss about the social phenomena and group formation of the dependence graph. In addition, the further works of other authors are listed in this paper. Also, we discuss the drawbacks and propose some potential solution for enhancing the dependence graph.

Keywords

Multi-agent systems Social reasoning mechanism Dependence graph Dependence network Dependence relationship 

References

  1. Adel G, Rajabi MH, Reza M (2010) A novel algorithm for coalition formation in multi-agent systems using cooperative game theory. In: 18th Iranian conference on electrical engineering (ICEE), 2010 , 11–13 May 2010, pp 512–516. doi:10.1109/iraniancee.2010.5507017
  2. An B, Miao C, Cheng D (2005a) A coalition formation framework based on transitive dependence. IEICE Trans Inf Syst E88-D (12):2672–2680. doi:10.1093/ietisy/e88-d.12.2672
  3. An B, Miao C, Tang L, Li S, Cheng D (2005b) Toward transitive dependence in MAS. In: Paper presented at the proceedings of the 6th international conference on intelligent data engineering and automated learning, Brisbane, AustraliaGoogle Scholar
  4. An B, Shen Z, Miao C, Cheng D (2007) Algorithms for transitive dependence-based coalition formation. IEEE Trans Ind Inf 3(3):234–245. doi:10.1109/tii.2007.902255 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Boella G, van der Torre L, Villata S (2009) CPottACMcoH, hypermedia four measures for the dynamics of coalitions in social networks, pp 361–362Google Scholar
  6. Boissier O, Demazeau YCMF (1994) Integration for intelligent systems IICoMFI Mavi: a multi-agent system for visual integration, pp 731–738Google Scholar
  7. Bonzon E, Schiex MCL, Lang J (2009) Dependencies between players in boolean games. Int J Approx Reason 50(6):899–914. doi:10.1016/j.ijar.2009.02.008 CrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar
  8. Bredin J, Kotz D, Rus D, Maheswaran RT, Imer C, Basar T (2001) A market-based model for resource allocation in agent systems. In: Coordination of internet agents. Springer, London, pp 426–442Google Scholar
  9. Bredin J, Maheswar RT, Imer C, Basar T, Kotz D, Rus D (2000) A game-theoretic formulation of multi-agent resource allocation. In: Proceedings of the fourth international conference on autonomous agents 2000 (AGENTS ’00 ). ACM, pp 349–356. doi:10.1145/336595.337525
  10. Caire P, Van Der Torre L (2009) CPoTtICoAA multiagent S–V temporal dependence networks for the design of convival multiagent systems (extended abstract), pp 1317–1318Google Scholar
  11. Caire P, Villata S, Boella G, van der Torre L (2008) CPottijcoAA, multiagent s-V Conviviality masks in multiagent systems. In, 1265–1268Google Scholar
  12. Chavez A, Moukas A, Maes P (1997) Challenger: a multi-agent system for distributed resource allocation. In: Proceedings of the first international conference on autonomous agents (AGENTS ’97), New York USA, pp 323–331. doi:10.1145/267658.267736
  13. Conte R, Sichman JS (2002) Dependence graphs: dependence within and between groups. Comput Math Organ Theory 8(2):87–112CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Costa A, Dimuro G (2007) Quantifying degrees of dependence in social dependence relations. Multi Agent Based Simul VII:172–187Google Scholar
  15. d’Inverno M, Luck M, Wooldridge M et al (1997) CIJCONAIË cooperation structures, pp 600–605Google Scholar
  16. Davis M, Maschler M (1963) The Kernel of a cooperative game. Naval Res Logist Q 12: 223–259Google Scholar
  17. de Lima do Rego Monteiro J, Sichman J (2006) PartNET++: simulating multiple agent partnerships using dependence graphs. Multi Agent Based Simul VI:14–23Google Scholar
  18. Durfee E (2006) Distributed problem solving and planning. Multiagent Syst Appl 2086 (2006) 118–149. doi:10.1007/3-540-47745-4_6
  19. Feldman M, Tennenholtz M (2010) Structured coalitions in resource selection games. ACM Trans Intell Syst Technol (TIST) 1(1): 1–21Google Scholar
  20. Gaspar G, Morgado L (2000) A social reasoning mechanism based on a new approach for coalition formation (trans: Informática Dd). Faculdade de Ciências da Universidade de Lisboa, PortugalGoogle Scholar
  21. Grossi D, Turrini P (2010) CPottICoAA, multiagent systems: dependence theory via game theory, vol V, pp 1147–1154Google Scholar
  22. Guessoum Z, Ziane M, Faci N (2004) CPotTIJCoAA, multiagent S–V monitoring and organizational-level adaptation of multi-agent systems, pp 514–521Google Scholar
  23. Guido B, der TLv, Serena V, (2008) Self adaptive coalitions in multiagent systems. IEEE 461–462Google Scholar
  24. Horling B, Lesser V (2004) A survey of multi-agent organizational paradigms. Knowl Eng Rev 19(4):281–316. doi:10.1017/s0269888905000317 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Hossein BM, Taghi HM, Nicole I, Hamid M (2010) The cooperative game theory foundations of network bargaining games automata, languages and programming. In: Abramsky S, Gavoille C, Kirchner C, Meyer auf der Heide F, Spirakis P (eds) Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol 6198. Springer, Heidelberg, pp 67–78. doi:10.1007/978-3-642-14165-2_7
  26. Komenda A, Vokrinek J, Pechoucek M (2011) Plan representation and execution in multi-actor scenarios by means of social commitments. Web Intell Agent Syst 9(2):123–133. doi:10.3233/wia-2011-0210 Google Scholar
  27. Morton D, Michael M (1967) The structure of the Kernel of a cooperative game. SIAM J Appl Math 15(3):569–604CrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  28. Nwana HS (1990) Intelligent tutoring systems: an overview. Artif Intell Rev 4(4):251–277CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Pistolesi G, Modesti P (2001) Complexity and state-transitions in social dependence networks. Discret Dyn Nat Soc Overseas Publ Assoc NV 6:49–56Google Scholar
  30. Rodrigues M, Costa A Bordini R (2002) A system of exchange values to support social interactions in artificial societies. In: AAMASzGoogle Scholar
  31. Rodrigues MR, Costa ACdR (2003) Using qualitative exchange values to improve the modelling of social interactions. In: 4th International workshop on multi-agent-based simulation III (MABS 2003) Melbourne, Australia, July 14. Revised papers, vol 2927. Springer Berlin, pp 57–72. doi:10.1007/978-3-540-24613-8_5
  32. Roth LS (1988) The shapley value essays in honor of Lloyd S. Shapley. Cambridge University Press, CambridgeCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Schillo M, BYMrckert HJ, Fischer K, Klusch M (2001) CPotficoAa towards a definition of robustness for market-style open multi-agent systems, pp 75–76Google Scholar
  34. Shapley LS (1953) A value for n-person games. Contrib Theory Games II(2): 1–13Google Scholar
  35. Sichman JS (1998) Depint: dependence-based coalition formationin an open multi-agent scenarios. J Artif Soc Soc Simul 1(2). http://jasss.soc.surrey.ac.uk/1/2/3.html
  36. Sichman JS, Conte R (2002) Multi-agent dependence by dependence graphs. In: Paper presented at the proceedings of the first international joint conference on autonomous agents and multiagent systems: part 1, Bologna, ItalyGoogle Scholar
  37. Sichman JS, Conte R, Demazeau Y, Castelfranchi C (1998) A social reasoning mechanism based on dependence networks. In: Michael NH, Munindar PS (eds) Readings in agents. Morgan Kaufmann, Los Altos, pp 416–420Google Scholar
  38. Sichman JS, Demazeau Y (2001) On social reasoning in multi-agent systems, vol 13. Revista Ibero-Americana de Inteligência ArtificialGoogle Scholar
  39. Smith RG (1980) The contract net protocol: high-level communication and control in a distributed problem solver. IEEE Trans Comput 100(12):1104–1113CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Sycara KP (1998) Multiagent systems. AI magazine, vol 19. AAAI, USAGoogle Scholar
  41. Vokrinek J, Komenda A, Pechoucek M (2009) Decommitting in multi-agent execution in non-deterministic environment: experimental approach. In: Paper presented at the proceedings of the 8th international conference on autonomous agents and multiagent Systems, vol 2, Budapest, HungaryGoogle Scholar
  42. Vokrinek J, Komenda A, Pechoucek M (2011) Abstract architecture for task-oriented multi-agent problem solving. IEEE Trans Syst Man Cybern Part C Appl Rev 41(1):31–40CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Wooldridge M (2009) An introduction to multiagent systems, 2nd edn. Wiley, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  44. Zlotkin G, Rosebschein JS (1994) Coalition, cryptography, and stability: mechanisms for coalition formation in task oriented domains. In: Paper presented at the the Proceeding of the twelveth national conference on artificial intelligence, Seattle, Washington, DC, August 1–4, 1994Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 2012

Authors and Affiliations

  • Billy Pik Lik Lau
    • 1
  • Ashutosh Kumar Singh
    • 1
  • Terence Peng Lian Tan
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Electrical and Computer EngineeringCurtin University SarawakSarawakMalaysia

Personalised recommendations