Agent Negotiation under Uncertainty and Risk
Traditional game theoretic reasoning for agent negotiation usually base on the assumption of rationality of agents who are expected utility maximizers. The utility functions that express preferences of agents over goods, states or money are essential in decision making of rational agents. However, the utility functions are very sensitive to agent’s wealth levels. To obtain the utility functions and wealth levels of other agents during the negotiation are extremely difficult. In this paper, we propose a way of getting around the problems by assuming the game theoretic decision making of rational agents be based on a monetary payoff game matrix instead of a utility payoff matrix. We regard utility functions and wealth levels of agents as private information while treating the monetary payoff game matrix as public information that is available to each agent. Rational agents of different risk preference types (e.g. risk averse, risk neutral and risk seeking) must negotiate to find a stable state using only the public information. We therefore extend the work of Wu and Soo who developed the negotiation mechanisms with a trusted third party as a mediator for agents to reach a stable equilibrium state under uncertain games. We discuss how the negotiation results based on the monetary payoff game matrix may be affected by different risk preferences of negotiating rational agents.
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
- Fabrycky, W. J., Thuesen, G. J., Decision Making Involving Risk, Chap 10 in Economic Decision Analysis, 2nd ed., 1980.Google Scholar
- Machina, M. J., Choice under Uncertainty: Problem Solved and Unsolved, Economic Perspective, Vol. 1, No. 1, pp 121–145, Summer, 1997.Google Scholar
- Gmytrasiewicz, P. J., Durfee, E. H., and Wehe, D. K., The Utility of Communication in Coordinating Intelligent Agents, In proceedings of A A AI, 1991.Google Scholar
- Mas-Colell, A., Whinston, M. D., and Green, J. R., Microeconomic Theory, Oxford University Press, 1995.Google Scholar
- Matsubara, S. and Yokoo, M., Cooperative Behavior in Iterated Game with a Change of the Payoff Values, In Proceedings of ICMAS, 1996.Google Scholar
- Pratt, J. W., Risk Aversion in the Small and in the Large, Econometrica, Vol. 32, No. 1–2, Jan.–Apr., 1964.Google Scholar
- Rosenschein, J. and Genensereth, M. R., Deals among Rational Agents, In Proceedings of IJCAI, 1985.Google Scholar
- Rosenschein, J. and Zlotkin, G., Rules of Encounter, MIT press, Cambridge, 1994.Google Scholar
- Sandholm T. W., and Lesser, V. R., Advantage of a Leveled Commitment Contracting Protocol, In Proceedings of AAAI, 1996.Google Scholar
- Wu, S. H. and Soo, V. W., Game Theoretic Approach to Multi-Agent Coordination by Negotiation with a Trusted Third Party, In Proceeding of the Third International Conference on Autonomous Agents, 1999.Google Scholar
- Wu, S. H. and Soo, V. W., Risk Control in Multi-agent Coordination by Negotiation with a Trusted Third Party, In Proceedings of IJCAI, 1999.Google Scholar
- Wu, S. H. and Soo, V. W., Making Rational Decisions in N-by-N Negotiation Games with a Trusted Third Party, In Proceedings of PRIMA, 1999.Google Scholar
- Zeng, D. and Sycara, K., Benefits of Learning in Negotiation, In Proceedings of AAAI, 1997.Google Scholar