A Rule-Driven Approach for Defining the Behaviour of Negotiating Software Agents

  • Morad Benyoucef
  • Hakim Alj
  • Kim Levy
  • Rudolf K. Keller
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 2468)


One problem with existing agent-mediated negotiation systems is that they rely on ad hoc, static, non-adaptive, and hardcoded schemes to represent the behavior of agents. This limitation is probably due to the complexity of the negotiation task itself. Indeed, while negotiating, software (human) agents face tough decisions. These decisions are based not only on the information made available by the negotiation server, but on the behavior of the other participants in the negotiation process as well. The information and the behavior in question are constantly changing and highly uncertain. In this paper, we propose a ruledriven approach to represent, manage and explore negotiation strategies and coordination information. Among the many advantages of this solution, we can cite the high level of abstraction, the closeness to human understanding, the versatility, and the possibility to modify the agents’ behavior during the negotiation. To validate our approach, we ran several agent tournaments, and used a rule-driven mechanism to implement bidding strategies that are common in the English and Dutch auctions. We also implemented simple coordination schemes across several auctions. The ongoing validation work is detailed and discussed in the second part of the paper.


Reserve Price Software Agent Bidding Strategy Online Auction Negotiation Strategy 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    J. O. Kephart, J. E. Hanson, and A. R. Greenwald. Dynamic pricing by software agents. Computer Networks, 2000. To appear.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    K. Jonkheer. Intelligent agents, markets and competition: consumers’ interests and functionality of destination sites. Published Electronically on FirstMonday, 1999.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    A. Moukas, R. Guttman, and P. Maes. Agent-mediated electronic commerce: An MIT media laboratory perspective. In proceeding of ICEC98, April 1998.Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    D. C. Parkes, L. H. Ungar, and D. P. Forster. Agent Mediated Electronic Commerce, chapter Accounting for Cognitive Costs in On-line Auction Design, pages 25–40. Springer-Verlag, 1999.Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    R. H. Guttman, A. G. Moukas, and P. Maes. Agent-mediated e-commerce: A survey. Knowledge Engineering 13(3), 1998.Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    A. Chavez and P. Maes. Kasbah: An agent marketplace for buying and selling goods. In The First International Conference on the Practical Application of Intelligent Agents and Multi-agent Technology, April 1996.Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    M. Benyoucef, H. Alj, M. Vézeau, and R. K. Keller. Combined Negotiations in E-Commerce: Concepts and Architecture. Electronic Commerce Research Journal, 1(3):277–299, July 2001. Special issue on Theory and Application of Electronic Market Design. Baltzer Science Publishers.Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    T. Ito, N. Fukuta, T. Shintani, and K. Sycara. Biddingbot: A multi-agent support system for cooperative bidding in multiple auctions. In 4th Intl Conference on Multi-agent Systems (ICMAS-2000), Boston. MA, July 2000.Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    C. Priest. Algorithm design for agents which participate in multiple simultaneous auctions. Tech. Report HLP-2000-88, Hewlett-Packard, Bristol, England, July 2000.Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    C. Beam, A. Segev, and G. Shanthikumar. Electronic negotiation through internet-based auctions. Tech. Report 96-WP1019, UC Berkeley, December 1996.Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    C. Beam and A. Segev. Automated negotiations: A survey of the state of the art. Technical Report 97-WP-1022, Haas School of Business, UC Berkeley, 1997.Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    A. R. Greenwald and J. O. Kephart. Shopbots and pricebots. In 16th Intl. Joint Conference on AI, volume 1, pages 506–511, Stockholm, Sweden, August 1999.Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    E. Gimenez-Fuentes, L. Godo, and J. A. Rodriguez-Aguillar. Designing bidding strategies for trading agents in electronic commerce. In Third Intl Conference on Multi-Agents Systems (ICMAS-98), Paris, France, July 1998.Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    W. Y. Wong, D. M. Zhang, and M. Kara-Ali. Negotiating with experience. In KBEM-2001, Austin, TX, 2000.Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    H. S. Nwana, L. Lee, and N. R. Jennings. Co-ordination in software agent systems. BT Technology Journal, 14(4):79–89, October 1996.Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    H. R. Varian. Economic mechanism design for computerized agents. In USENIX Workshop on Electronic Commerce, New York, NY, July 1995.Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    A.R. Lomuscio, M. Wooldridge and N.R. Jennings. A classification Scheme for negotiation in electronic commerce. In Agent-mediated e-commerce: a European AgentLink Perspective, pages 19–33, Springer-Verlag, 2001.Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    S. Y. Su, C. Huang, and J. Hammer. A replicable web based negotiation server for e-commerce. In 33rd International Conference on System Sciences, Hawaii, 2000.Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    B. N. Grosof. Courteous logic programs: Prioritized conflict handling for rules. Tech. Report RC 20836, IBM Research, T.J. Watson Research Center, May 1997.Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    D. Zeng and K. Sycara. Bayesian learning in negotiation. International Journal of Human-Computer Studies, (48):125–141, 1998.Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    C. McClintock and C. A. Berlioz. Implementing business rules in java. Java Developers Journal, May 2000.Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    D. M. Reeves, B. N. Grosof, Michael P. Wellman, and Hoi Y. Chan. Toward a declarative language for negotiating executable contracts. In Workshop on AI in Electronic Commerce, Menlo Park, CA, 1999.Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    B. N. Grosof, Y. Labrou, and H. Y. Chan. A declarative approach to business rules in contracts: Courteous logic programs in XML. In 1st Conference on Electronic Commerce, Denver, Colorado, November 1999.Google Scholar
  24. 24.
  25. 25.
    N. R. Jennings, P. Faratin, A. R. Lomuscio, S. Parsons, C. Sierra, and M. Wooldridge. Automated negotiation: Prospects, methods and challenges. International Journal of Group Decision and Negotiation, 10(2), 2001. To appear.Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    M Berndtsson, S. Chakravarthy, and B. Lings. Coordination among agents using reactive rules. Tech. Report HS-IDA-TR-96-011, Skovde U., Sweden, October 1996.Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    L. J. Mester. Going, Going, Gone: Setting Prices with Auctions. Federal Reserve Bank of Philadelphia Business Review (March/April):3–13 1988Google Scholar
  28. 28.
  29. 29.
    R. F. Easly and R. Tenorio. Bidding Strategies in Internet Yankee Auctions. Working paper, University of Notre Dame, 1999.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2002

Authors and Affiliations

  • Morad Benyoucef
    • 1
  • Hakim Alj
    • 1
  • Kim Levy
    • 1
  • Rudolf K. Keller
    • 2
  1. 1.Département d’informatique et de recherche opérationnelleUniversité de MontréalMontréalCanada
  2. 2.Zuehlke Engineering AGSchlierenSwitzerland

Personalised recommendations