Advertisement

Practical Strategic Reasoning and Adaptation in Rational Argument-Based Negotiation

  • Michael Rovatsos
  • Iyad Rahwan
  • Felix Fischer
  • Gerhard Weiss
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 4049)

Abstract

Recent years have seen an increasing interest of multiagent system research in employing the theory of argumentation for the development of communication protocols. While significant progress has been made in formalising argument-based communication, (possibly adaptive) agent-level argumentation strategies as a practical integration of rational agent reasoning and inter-agent argumentation dialogues have received fairly little attention. In this paper we propose the use of the InFFrA framework in argument-based negotiation. This framework allows for a strategic and adaptive communication to achieve private goals within the limits of bounded rationality in open argumentation communities. The feasibility of the approach is illustrated in an agent-based web linkage scenario, showing that its performance is comparable to that of simple proposal-based negotiation while accommodating much stricter constraints regarding “what can be said” like those used in argumentation.

Keywords

Multiagent System Autonomous Agent Argumentation Strategy Goal Structure Active Frame 
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.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    Amgoud, L., Maudet, N.: Strategical considerations for argumentative agents (preliminary report). In: Benferhat, S., Giunchiglia, E. (eds.) Proceedings of the 9th International Workshop on Non-Monotonic Reasoning (NMR 2002): Special session on Argument, Dialogue and Decision, pp. 399–407 (2002)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Amgoud, L., Parsons, S., Maudet, N.: Arguments, dialogue, and negotiation. In: Horn, W. (ed.) Proceedings of the European Conference on Artificial Intelligence (ECAI), pp. 338–342. IOS Press, Amsterdam (2000)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Atkinson, K., Bench-Capon, T., McBurney, P.: A dialogue game protocol for multi-agent argument over proposals for action. In: Rahwan, I., Moraïtis, P., Reed, C. (eds.) ArgMAS 2004. LNCS, vol. 3366, pp. 149–161. Springer, Heidelberg (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Bratman, M.E.: Intentions, Plans and Practical Reason. Harvard University Press, Cambridge (1987)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Cohen, P.R., Levesque, H.J.: Communicative actions for artificial agents. In: Proceedings of the First International Conference on Multi-Agent Systems (ICMAS), pp. 65–72 (1995)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Dignum, V.: A model for organizational interaction: based on agents, founded in logic. PhD thesis, Utrecht University, The Netherlands (2004)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Fischer, F., Rovatsos, M.: Reasoning about communication: A practical approach based on empirical semantics. In: Klusch, M., Ossowski, S., Kashyap, V., Unland, R. (eds.) CIA 2004. LNCS (LNAI), vol. 3191, pp. 107–122. Springer, Heidelberg (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Fischer, F., Rovatsos, M., Weiß, G.: Acquiring and adapting probabilistic models of agent conversation. In: Proceedings of the 4th International Joint Conference on Autonomous Agents and Multiagent Systems (AAMAS), Utrecht, The Netherlands (2005)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Fornara, N., Colombetti, M.: Operational specification of a commitment-based agent communication language. In: Gini, M., Ishida, T., Castelfranchi, C., Johnson, W.L. (eds.) Proceedings of the First International Joint Conference on Autonomous Agents and Multiagent Systems (AAMAS), Bologna, Italy, pp. 536–542. ACM Press, New York (2002)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Kakas, A., Moraitis, P.: Argumentation based decision making for autonomous agents. In: Proceedings of the 2nd International Joint Conference on Autonomous Agents and Multiagent Systems (AAMAS), Melbourne, Australia, pp. 883–890 (2003)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Kone, M.T., Shimazu, A., Nakajima, T.: The state of the art in agent communication languages. Knowledge and Information Systems 2, 259–284 (2000)MATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Krause, P., Ambler, S., Elvang-Gøransson, M., Fox, J.: A logic of argumentation for reasoning under uncertainty. Computational Intelligence 11, 113–131 (1995)CrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    McBurney, P.: Rational Interaction. PhD thesis, University of Liverpool (2002)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Parsons, S., Wooldridge, M.J., Amgoud, L.: Properties and complexity of formal inter-agent dialogues. Journal of Logic and Computation 13(3), 347–376 (2003)MATHCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Precup, D.: Temporal Abstraction in Reinforcement Learning. PhD thesis, Department of Computer Science, University of Massachusetts, Amherst (2000)Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Rahwan, I., Ramchurn, S.D., Jennings, N.R., McBurney, P., Parsons, S., Sonenberg, L.: Argumentation-based negotiation. Knowledge Engineering Review 18(4) (2003)Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Rahwan, I.: Interest-based Negotiation in Multi-Agent Systems. PhD thesis, Department of Information Systems, University of Melbourne, Melbourne, Australia (2004)Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Rao, A.S., Georgeff, M.P.: An abstract architecture for rational agents. In: Swartout, W., Rich, C., Nebel, B. (eds.) Proceedings of Knowledge Representation and Reasoning (KR&R), pp. 439–449 (1992)Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Rovatsos, M.: Computational Interaction Frames. PhD thesis, Department of Informatics, Technical University of Munich (2004)Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Rovatsos, M., Nickles, M., Weiss, G.: Interaction is meaning: A new model for communication in open systems. In: Proceedings of the 2nd International Joint Conference on Autonomous Agents and Multiagent Systems (AAMAS) (2003)Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Rovatsos, M., Weiß, G., Wolf, M.: An Approach to the Analysis and Design of Multiagent Systems based on Interaction Frames. In: Gini, M., Ishida, T., Castelfranchi, C., Johnson, W.L. (eds.) Proceedings of the First International Joint Conference on Autonomous Agents and Multiagent Systems (AAMAS), Bologna, Italy. ACM Press, New York (2002)Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Singh, M.P.: A semantics for speech acts. Annals of Mathematics and Artificial Intelligence 8(1–2), 47–71 (1993)MATHCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Singh, M.P.: A social semantics for agent communication languages. In: Proceedings of the IJCAI Workshop on Agent Communication Languages (2000)Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Tadepalli, P., Givan, R., Driessens, K.: Relational Reinforcement Learning: An Overview. In: Proceedings of the Workshop on Relational Reinforcement Learning, Banff, Alberta, Canada (2004)Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Walton, D.N., Krabbe, E.C.W.: Commitment in Dialogue: Basic Concepts of Interpersonal Reasoning. SUNY Press, Albany (1995)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2006

Authors and Affiliations

  • Michael Rovatsos
    • 1
  • Iyad Rahwan
    • 2
  • Felix Fischer
    • 3
  • Gerhard Weiss
    • 3
  1. 1.School of InformaticsThe University of EdinburghEdinburghUK
  2. 2.Institute of InformaticsThe British University in DubaiDubai, UAE
  3. 3.Department of InformaticsTechnical University of MunichGarchingGermany

Personalised recommendations