Trust-Based Selection of Partners

  • Joana Urbano
  • Ana Paula Rocha
  • Eugénio Oliveira
Part of the Lecture Notes in Business Information Processing book series (LNBIP, volume 85)


The community of multi-agent systems has been studying ways to improve the selection of partner agents for joint action. One of such approaches consists in estimating the trustworthiness of potential partners in order to decrease the risk inherent to interacting with unknown agents. In this paper, we study the effect of using trust in the process of selecting partners in electronic business. We empirically evaluate and compare different trust-based selection methods, which either use trust in a preselection phase previous to the negotiation, in the negotiation process, or in both of these stages. We here briefly introduce a computational model of trust that uses a simple machine learning mechanism to dynamically derive the expected tendencies of behavior of potential candidate partner agents. The results obtained in our comparison study allow us to point to the best trust-based selecting methods to use in specific situations.


Computational trust selection of partners multi-agent systems 


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    Dasgupta, P.: Trust as a Commodity. In: Gambetta, D. (ed.) Trust: Making and Breaking Cooperative Relations, Department of Sociology, University of Oxford, pp. 49–72 (2000)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Jøsang, A., Ismail, R.: The Beta Reputation System. In: Proceedings of the 15th Bled Electronic Commerce Conference (2002)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Huynh, T.D., Jennings, N.R., Shadbolt, N.R.: An integrated trust and reputation model for open multi-agent systems. Autonomous Agents and Multi-Agent Systems 13, 119–154 (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Yu, B., Singh, M.P.: An Evidential Model of Distributed Reputation Management. In: Proceedings of the First International Joint Conference on Autonomous Agents and Multiagent Systems: part 1., AAMAS 2002, pp. 294–301(2002)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Kerschbaum, F., Haller, J., Karabulut, Y., Robinson, P.: Pathtrust: A trust-based reputation service for virtual organization formation. In: Stølen, K., Winsborough, W.H., Martinelli, F., Massacci, F. (eds.) iTrust 2006. LNCS, vol. 3986, pp. 193–205. Springer, Heidelberg (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Marsh, S., Briggs, P.: Examining Trust, Forgiveness and Regret as Computational Concepts. In: Golbeck, J. (ed.) Computing with Social Trust. Human-Computer Interaction Series, pp. 9–43. Springer, London (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Urbano, J., Rocha, A.P., Oliveira, E.: Computing confidence values: Does trust dynamics matter? In: Lopes, L.S., Lau, N., Mariano, P., Rocha, L.M. (eds.) EPIA 2009. LNCS, vol. 5816, pp. 520–531. Springer, Heidelberg (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Melaye, D., Demazeau, Y.: Bayesian dynamic trust model. In: Multi-Agent Systems and Applications Iv, Proceedings, vol. 3690, pp. 480–489 (2005)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Joseph, S., Sierra, C., Schorlemmer, M., Dellunde, P.: Deductive coherence and norm adoption. Logic Journal of the IGPL 18, 118–156 (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Castelfranchi, C., Falcone, R., Pezzulo, G.: Trust in information sources as a source for trust: a fuzzy approach. In: Procs. of the Second International Joint Conference on Autonomous Agents and Multiagent Systems, AAMAS 2003, pp. 89–96 (2003)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Maximilien, E.M., Singh, M.P.: Agent-based trust model involving multiple qualities. In: Proceedings of the Fourth International Joint Conference on Autonomous Agents and Multiagent Systems (July 2005)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Gujral, N., DeAngelis, D., Fullam, K.K., Barber, K.S.: Modeling multi-dimensional trust. In: Procs. of The Workshop on Trust in Agent Societies at AAMAS 2006, pp. 35–41 (2006)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Griffiths, N.: Task delegation using experience-based multi-dimensional trust. In: Proceedings of the Fourth International Joint Conference on Autonomous Agents and Multiagent Systems, AAMAS 2005, New York, NY, USA, pp. 489–496 (2005)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Padovan, B., Sackmann, S., Eymann, T., Pippow, I.: A prototype for an agent-based secure electronic marketplace including reputation-tracking mechanisms. Int. J. Electron. Commerce 6, 93–113 (2002)Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Rocha, A.P., Oliveira, E.: An electronic market architecture for the formation of virtual enterprises. In: Proceedings of the IFIP TC5 WG5.3 / PRODNET Working Conference on Infrastructures for Virtual Enterprises: Networking Industrial Enterprises, pp. 421–432. Kluwer, B.V., Deventer, The Netherlands (1999)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Urbano, J., Rocha, A.P., Oliveira, E.: Trustworthiness tendency incremental extraction using information gain. In: Proceedings of the 2010 IEEE/WIC/ACM International Conference on Web Intelligence and Intelligent Agent Technology, WI-IAT 2010, vol. 2, pp. 411–414. IEEE Computer Society, Los Alamitos (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Quinlan, J.R.: Induction of Decision Trees. Mach. Learn. 1, 81–106 (1986)Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    North, M., Howe, T., Collier, N., Vos, J.: A declarative model assembly infrastructure for verification and validation. In: Takahashi, S., Sallach, D.L., Rouchier, J. (eds.) Advancing Social Simulation: The First World Congress. Springer, Heidelberg (2007)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2011

Authors and Affiliations

  • Joana Urbano
    • 1
  • Ana Paula Rocha
    • 1
  • Eugénio Oliveira
    • 1
  1. 1.LIACC / Departamento de Engenharia Informática, Faculdade de EngenhariaUniversidade do PortoPortoPortugal

Personalised recommendations