Argument-Based Decision Making and Negotiation in E-Business: Contracting a Land Lease for a Computer Assembly Plant

  • Phan Minh Dung
  • Phan Minh Thang
  • Nguyen Duy Hung
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 5405)


We describe an extensive application of argument-based decision making and negotiation to a real-world scenario in which an investor agent and an estate manager agent negotiate to lease a land for a computer assembly factory. Agents are equipped with beliefs, goals, preferences, and argument-based decision-making mechanisms taking uncertainties into account. Goals are classified as either structural or contractual. The negotiation process is divided into two phases. In the first phase, following a recently proposed framework [8] the investor agent find suitable locations based on its structural goals such as requirements about transportation; the estate manager agent determines favored tenants based on its structural goals such as requirements about resource conservation. In the second phase, we introduce a new novel argument-based negotiation protocol for agents to agree on contract to fulfill their contractual goals such as waste disposal cost.


Argumentation Framework Structural Goal Serial Line Buyer Agent Prefer Extension 
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.
    Amata. Amata Vietnam (June 2008),
  2. 2.
    Amgoud, L., Dimopolous, Y., Moraitis, P.: A unified and general framework for argumentation-based negotiation. In: Proc. AAMAS 2007 (2007)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Atkinson, K., Bench-Capon, T.: Practical reasoning as presumptive argumentation using action based alternating transition systems. Artificial Intelligence 171(10-15), 855–874 (2007)MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Bondarenko, A., Dung, P.M., Kowalski, R.A., Toni, F.: An abstract, argumentation-theoretic approach to default reasoning. Artificial Intelligence 93(1-2), 63–101 (1997)MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Chevaleyre, Y., Dunne, P.E., Endriss, U., Lang, J., Lemaître, M., Maudet, N., Padget, J., Phelps, S., Rodríguez-aguilar, J.A., Sousa, P.: Issues in multiagent resource allocation. Informatica 30 (2006)zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Dung, P.M.: On the acceptability of arguments and its fundamental role in non-monotonic reasoning, logic programming and n-person games. Artificial Intelligence 77, 321–357 (1995)MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Dung, P.M., Kowalski, R.A., Toni, F.: Dialectic proof procedures for assumption-based, admissible argumentation. Artificial Intelligence 170, 114–159 (2006)MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Dung, P.M., Thang, P.M., Toni, F.: Towards argumentation-based contract negotiation. In: COMMA 2008 (2008)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Endriss, U.: Monotonic concession protocols for multilateral negotiation. In: Stone, P., Weiss, G. (eds.) Proceedings of the 5th International Joint Conference on Autonomous Agents and Multiagent Systems (AAMAS 2006), pp. 392–399. ACM Press, New York (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Furey, T.M.: Decision elements in the design of a consumer electronics assembly plant. Master’s thesis, Sloan School Of Management, Massachusetts Institute of Technology (May 1999)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Kakas, A.C., Moraitis, P.: Argumentation based decision making for autonomous agents. In: Proc. AAMAS 2003, pp. 883–890 (2003)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Morge, M., Mancarella, P.: The hedgehog and the fox: An argumentation-based decision support system. In: Rahwan, I., Parsons, S., Reed, C. (eds.) Argumentation in Multi-Agent Systems. LNCS, vol. 4946, pp. 114–131. Springer, Heidelberg (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Morge, M., Mancarella, P.: Computing assumption-based argumentation for multi-criteria decision making. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research (January 2008)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Nash, J.F.: Two-person cooperative games. Econometrica 21, 128–140 (1953)MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Osborne, M.J., Rubinstein, A.: Course in game theory. MIT Press, Cambridge (1994)zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Rahwan, I., Amgoud, L.: An argumentation-based approach for practical reasoning. In: Proc. AAMAS 2006, pp. 347–354. ACM Press, New York (2006)Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Rahwan, I., Ramchurn, S., Jennings, N., McBurney, P., Parsons, S., Sonenberg, L.: Argumentation-based negotiation. The Knowledge Engineering Review 18(4), 343–375 (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Josefina Ramos, M.: Industrial estates and regional development in selected Asian countries: a review of experience. United Nations Centre for Regional Development (1991)Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Shell, G.R.: Bargaining Negotiation Strategies for Reasonable People for Advantage. Penguin Books (1999)Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    UNIDO. Industrial Estates Principles and Practices. Technical report, United Nations Industrial Development Organization (1997)Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    van Veenen, J., Prakken, H.: A protocol for arguing about rejections in negotiation. In: Parsons, S., Maudet, N., Moraitis, P., Rahwan, I. (eds.) ArgMAS 2005. LNCS (LNAI), vol. 4049, pp. 138–153. Springer, Heidelberg (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Zhang, D.: Reasoning about bargaining situations. In: Procs AAAI 2007, pp. 154–159 (2007)Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Zlotkin, G., Rosenschein, J.S.: Negotiation and task sharing among autonomous agents in cooperative domains. In: Proc. IJCAI, pp. 912–917 (1989)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2009

Authors and Affiliations

  • Phan Minh Dung
    • 1
  • Phan Minh Thang
    • 1
  • Nguyen Duy Hung
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Computer ScienceAsian Institute of TechnologyKlong LuangThailand

Personalised recommendations