Electronic Commerce Research

, Volume 1, Issue 4, pp 371–401 | Cite as

Bargaining on an Internet Agent-based Market: Behavioral vs. Optimizing Agents

  • Laurent Deveaux
  • Corina Paraschiv
  • Mathieu Latourrette


In this paper, we analyze an Internet agent-based market where non-cooperative agents using behavioral rules negotiate the price of a given product in a bilateral and sequential manner. In this setting, we study the optimal decision-making process of a buying agent that enters the market. Our approach is based on Negotiation Analysis (Raiffa, 1982; Sebenuis, 1992) and we consider that the optimizing buying agent maximizes her discounted expected utility using subjective probabilities. The optimal decision-making process of the buying agent is treated as a stochastic control problem that can be solved by dynamic programming. Three types of behavioral agents are studied, namely conceder agents, boulware agents and imitative agents. A set of simulations is undertaken in order to predict the average outcome in a negotiation process for different parameters of the optimizing buying agent and for the three possible selling agents' behaviors. Finally, we compare the performance of the optimizing agent with that of behavioral buying agents.

software agent negotiation optimization behavioral rules simulations 


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. Arndt, J. (1979). “Toward a Concept of Domesticated Markets.” Journal of Marketing 43(3), 69–75.Google Scholar
  2. Axelrod, R. (1984). The Evolution of Cooperation. New York: Basic Books.Google Scholar
  3. Bellman, R.E. (1957). Dynamic Programming. Princeton: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
  4. Beam, C. and A. Segev. (1996). “Electronic Catalogs and Negotiations.” CITM Working Paper 96-WP-1016, University of California, Berkeley.Google Scholar
  5. Binmore, K. and N. Vulkan. (1999). “Applying Game Theory to Automated Negotiation.” Netnomics 1(1), 1–9.Google Scholar
  6. Chavez, A. and P. Maes. (1996). “Kasbah: An Agent Marketplace for Buying and Selling Goods.” In Proceedings of the First International Conference on the Practical Application of Intelligent Agents and Multi-Agent Technology. London.Google Scholar
  7. Cramton, P.C. (1991). “Dynamic Bargaining with Transaction Costs.” Management Science 37, 1221–1233.Google Scholar
  8. Cramton, P.C. (1992). “Strategic Delay in Bargaining with Two-sided Uncertainty.” The Review of Economic Studies 59, 205–225.Google Scholar
  9. Cross, J.G. (1965). “A Theory of Bargaining Process.” American Economic Review 55, 67–94.Google Scholar
  10. Evans, F.B. (1963). “Selling as a Dyadic Relationship-A New Approach.” American Behavioral Scientist 6, 76–79.Google Scholar
  11. Faratin, P., C. Sierra and N.R. Jennings. (1998). “Negotiation Decision Functions for Autonomous Agents.” Journal of Robotics and Autonomous Systems 24(3–4), 159–182.Google Scholar
  12. Fisher, R. and W. Ury. (1981). Getting to Yes: Negotiation Agreement Without Giving In. Boston: Houghton Mifflin.Google Scholar
  13. Fogelman-Soulié, F., B. Munier and M.F. Shakun. (1983). “Bivariate Negotiations as a Problem of Stochastic Terminal Control.” Management Science 29(7), 840–855.Google Scholar
  14. Guttman, R., A. Moukas and P. Maes. (1998). “Agent-mediated Electronic Commerce: A Survey.” Knowledge Engineering Review 13(2), 147–159.Google Scholar
  15. Jennings, N.R. and M.J. Wooldridge, eds. (1998). Agent Technology. Berlin: Springer.Google Scholar
  16. Kadane, J.B. and P.D. Larkey. (1982). “Subjective Probability and the Theory of Game.” Management Science 28(2), 113–120.Google Scholar
  17. Kraus, S. and J.Wilkenfield. (1991). “Negotiations over Time in a Multiagent Environment: Preliminary Report.” In Proceedings of the 12th International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence. Sydney.Google Scholar
  18. Kraus, S. (1997). “Negotiation and Cooperation in Multi-agent Environments.” Artificial Intelligence 94(1–2), 79–98.Google Scholar
  19. Kraus, S. (1997). “Beliefs, Time and Incomplete Information in Multiple Encounter Negotiations among Autonomous Agents.” Annals of Mathematics and Artificial Intelligence 20(1–4), 111–159.Google Scholar
  20. Leloup, B. and L. Deveaux. (2001). “Dynamic Pricing on the Internet: Theory and Simulations.” Electronic Commerce Research Journal 1(3), 53–64.Google Scholar
  21. Liang, T.-P. and H.-S. Doong. (2000). “Effect of Bargaining in Electronic Commerce.” International Journal of Electronic Commerce 4(3), 23–43.Google Scholar
  22. Matos, N., C. Sierra and N.R. Jennings. (1998). “Determining Successful Negotiation Strategies: An Evolutionary Approach.” In Proceedings of the Third International Conference on Multi-agent Systems. Paris.Google Scholar
  23. Nash, J.F. (1950). “The Bargaining Problem.” Econometrica 18, 155–162.Google Scholar
  24. Parson, S. and M.J. Wooldridge. (2001). “Game Theoretic and Decision Theoretic Agents.” Forthcoming in The Knowledge Engineering Review.Google Scholar
  25. Pruitt, D.G. (1981). Negotiation Behavior. New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar
  26. Raiffa, H. (1982). The Art and The Science of Negotiation. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  27. Rao, A.G. and M.F. Shakun. (1974). “A Normative Model of Negotiation.” Management Science 20(10), 1364–1375.Google Scholar
  28. Rapoport, A., I. Evev and R. Zwick. (1995). “An experimental Study of Buyer-seller Negotiation with One-sided Incomplete Information and Time Discounting.” Management Science 41(3), 377–394.Google Scholar
  29. Rosenschein, J.S. and G. Zlotkin. (1994). Designing Conventions for Automated Negotiation among Computers. Cambridge: The MIT Press.Google Scholar
  30. Sandholm, T. and V. Lesser. (1995). “Issues in Automated Negotiation and Electronic Commerce: Extending the Contract Net Protocol.” In Proceedings of the First International Conference on Multiagent Systems. San Francisco.Google Scholar
  31. Savage, L.J. (1954). The Foundations of Statistics. New York: Wiley.Google Scholar
  32. Sebenuis, J.K. (1992). “Negotiation Analysis: A Characterization and Review.” Management Science 38(1), 18–38.Google Scholar
  33. Vulkan, N. (1999). “Economic Implications of Agent Technology and E-commerce.” The Economic Journal 109, F67-F90.Google Scholar
  34. West, P.M., D. Ariely, E. Bellman, J. Huber, E. Johnson, B. Kahn, J. Little and D. Schkade. (1999). “Agent to the Rescue?” Marketing Letters 10(3), 285–300.Google Scholar
  35. Zeng, D. and K. Sycara. (1998). “Bayesian Learning in Negotiation.” International Journal of Human-Computer Studies 48, 125–141.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Kluwer Academic Publishers 2001

Authors and Affiliations

  • Laurent Deveaux
    • 1
    • 2
  • Corina Paraschiv
    • 1
    • 2
  • Mathieu Latourrette
    • 1
    • 2
  1. 1.Groupe de recherche sur le Risque, l'Information et la DécisionÉcole Normale Supérieure de CachanCachan CedexFrance
  2. 2.Laboratoire d'informatique, de robotique et de micro-électroniqueMontpellier Cedex 5France

Personalised recommendations