Group Decision and Negotiation

, Volume 12, Issue 2, pp 111–125 | Cite as

Negotiating Complex Contracts

  • Mark Klein
  • Peyman Faratin
  • Hiroki Sayama
  • Yaneer Bar-Yam
Article

Abstract

Work to date on computational models of negotiation has focused almost exclusively on defining contracts consisting of one or a few independent issues and tractable contract spaces. Many real-world contracts, by contrast, are much more complex, consisting of multiple inter-dependent issues and intractably large contract spaces. This paper describes a simulated annealing based approach appropriate for negotiating such complex contracts that achieves near-optimal social welfares for negotiations with binary issue dependencies.

interdependent issues non-linear negotiation 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Axelrod, R. (1984). The Evolution Of Cooperation. Basic Books.Google Scholar
  2. Bar-Yam, Y. (1997). Dynamics of Complex Systems. Reading, Mass.: Addison-Wesley, xvi, 848.Google Scholar
  3. Bichler, M. and J. Kalagnanam. (2002). Bidding Languages and Winner Determination in Multi-Attribute Auctions.Google Scholar
  4. Ehtamo, H., E. Ketteunen, and R. Hamalainen. (1997). “Searching for Joint Gains in Multi-Party Negotiations,” European Journal of Operational Research 1 (30), 54-69.Google Scholar
  5. Faratin, P., C. Sierra, and N. R. Jennings. (2000). “Using Similarity Criteria to Make Negotiation Trade-Offs. Proceedings Fourth International Conference on MultiAgent Systems. IEEE Comput. Soc.Google Scholar
  6. Kalagnanam, J. and D. Parkes. (2003). “Auctions, Bidding and Exchange Design,” in Simchi-Levi Wu and Shen (eds.), Supply Chain Analysis in the eBusiness Area. Kluwer Academic Publishers.Google Scholar
  7. Kalos, M. H. and P. A. Whitlock. (1986). Monte Carlo Methods. New York: J. Wiley & Sons.Google Scholar
  8. Kauffman, S. A. (1993). The Origins of Order: Self-Organization and Selection in Evolution. Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  9. Kowalczyk, R. and V. Bui. (2001). “On Constraint-Based Reasoning in e-Negotiation Agents,” in F. Dignum and U. Cortes (eds.), Agent-Mediated Electronic Commerce III, Current Issues in Agent-Based Electronic Commerce. Springer, 31-46Google Scholar
  10. Raiffa, H. (1982). The Art and Science of Negotiation. Cambridge, Mass.: Belknap Press of Harvard University Press, x, 373.Google Scholar
  11. Rosenschein, J. S. and G. Zlotkin. (1994). Rules of Encounter: Designing Conventions for Automated Negotiation Among Computers. Artificial intelligence. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press, xxi, 229.Google Scholar
  12. Sandholm, T. W. (1998). “Distributed Rational Decision Making,” in G. Weiss (ed.), Multi-Agent Systems. 126Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Kluwer Academic Publishers 2003

Authors and Affiliations

  • Mark Klein
    • 1
  • Peyman Faratin
    • 1
  • Hiroki Sayama
    • 2
  • Yaneer Bar-Yam
    • 2
  1. 1.Massachusetts Institute of TechnologyCambridgeUSA
  2. 2.New England Complex Systems InstituteCambridgeUSA

Personalised recommendations