SOSBP: An Efficient Bargaining Protocol for E-Market

  • Liu Hong
  • Haigang Song
  • Xueguang Chen
  • Qihua Zhang
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 5551)

Abstract

Alternating-Offer Protocol (AOP) is the most predominant way for one-to one bargaining. In this paper, we provide an alternative protocol, Sealed-Offer Synchronous Bargaining Protocol (SOSBP), which can be useful for the automated bargaining between self-interested agents for Open E-Marketplaces. SOSBP introduces an intermediary agent who monitors the bargaining process and hides buyer’s offers from seller, and vice versa. Using SOSBP, agents could free submit their offers for evaluating because the intermediary agent has no preference on both buyer and seller. We design some mechanisms to facilitate the success of bargaining, such as Minimum Concession, Concession Reward, Surplus Quote and etc, and present the basic framework of SOSBP. From the result of strategy analysis and experimental study, we concluded that SOSBP has better performance than AOP when agents negotiate under specified situation.

Keywords

Automated negotiation MAS Bargaining strategy SOSBP Alternating-Offer Protocol 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    Lomuscio, A., Wooldridge, M., Jennings, N.R.: A Classification Scheme for Negotiation in Electronic Commerce. In: Sierra, C., Dignum, F.P.M. (eds.) AgentLink 2000. LNCS, vol. 1991, pp. 19–33. Springer, Heidelberg (2001)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Jiang, W.J., Xu, Y.S.: A Novel Multi-agent Automated Negotiation Model Based on Associated Intent. Agent Computing and Multi-Agent Systems 4088, 608–613 (2006)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Rubinstein, A.: Perfect Equilibrium in a Bargaining Model. Econometrica 50, 97–109 (1982)MathSciNetCrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Fatima, S., Wooldridge, M.J., Jennings, N.R.: Optimal Negotiation Strategies for Agents with Incomplete Information. In: Meyer, J.J., Tambe, M. (eds.) Intelligent Agent series VIII: Proc. 8th Intern. Workshop on Agent Theories, Architectures, and Languages, ATAL (2001)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Sandholm, T., Vulkan, N.: Bargaining with Deadlines. In: AAAI 1999, pp. 44–51, Orlando, FL (1999)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Winoto, P., McCalla, G.I., Vassileva, J.: Non-monotonic-offers Bargaining Protocol. Autonomous Agents and Multi-Agent Systems 11, 45–67 (2005)CrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Rahwan, I., McBurney, P., Sonenberg, L.: Towards a Theory of Negotiation Strategy (A Preliminary Report). In: Proceedings of the Workshop on Game Theoretic and Decision Theoretic Agents (GTDT), Melbourne, Australia (2003)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Jennings, N.R., Faratin, P., Lomuscio, A.R., Parsons, S., Sierra, C., Wooldridge, M.: Automated Negotiation: Prospects, Methods and Challenges. International Journal of Group Decision and Negotiation 10, 199–215 (2001)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    John, C., Ben, Y., Scott, J., Bamshad, M., Maria, G.: A Market Architecture for Multi-agent Contracting. In: Proc. of the Second Int’l Conf. on Autonomous Agents, pp. 285–292 (1998)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2009

Authors and Affiliations

  • Liu Hong
    • 1
    • 3
  • Haigang Song
    • 2
  • Xueguang Chen
    • 1
    • 3
  • Qihua Zhang
    • 4
  1. 1.Institute of System EngineeringHuazhong University of Science and TechnologyWuhanP. R. China
  2. 2.Basic Research Service of the Ministry of Science and Technology of the P. R. ChinaBeijingP. R. China
  3. 3.Key Lab. for Image Processing & Intelligent controlHuazhong University of Science and TechnologyWuhanP. R. China
  4. 4.Semiconductor Manufacturing International CorporationShanghaiP. R. China

Personalised recommendations