Dependence Based Coalitions and Contract Net: A Comparative Analysis
Among several models of dynamic organizations, one can find Contract Net [14,4] and Dependence Based Coalitions [11,12,13] models. In this work, we present a comparative analysis of these models. More precisely, we compare the global communication flow of these two models, by changing some relevant parameters that have influence on the total number of exchanged messages. Our main goal is to be able to detect under which conditions one of the models is better than the other, concerning the global communication flow and the parameters values.
Keywordsorganization and social structure coalition formation organisation self-design
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
- 1.BOND, A.H.; GASSER, L. Readings in Distributed Artificial Intelligence. Palo Alto, Morgan Kaufmann Publishers, Inc.,1988.Google Scholar
- 2.CASTELFRANCHI, C.; MICELI, M.; CESTA, A. Dependence relations among autonomous agents. In: Werner, E.; Demazeau, Y editors, Decentralized A.I. 3-Third European Workshop on Modelling Autonomous Agents in a Multi-Agent World, Germany, 1991. Proceedings. Netherlands, Elsevier Science Publishers B.V., 1992, v.1, p. 215–227.Google Scholar
- 3.DAVID, N.; SICHMAN, J. S.; COELHO, H. Extending social reasoning to cope with multiple partner coalitions. In: Ninth European Workshop on Modelling Autonomous Agents in a Multi-Agent World. Proceedings.Google Scholar
- 5.DECKER, K. Distributed problem-solving techniques: a survey. IEEE Transactions on System, Man and Cybernetics, v.17, p.729–740, 1987.Google Scholar
- 6.HEWITT, C. E. Some requirements for mobile distributed telecomputing architecture. In Cristiano Castelfranchi and Eric Werner, editors, Artificial Social Systems, volume 830 of Lecture Notes in Artificial Intelligence, pages 259–270. Springer-Verlag, Berlin, DE, 1993.Google Scholar
- 7.ITO, M. Uma análise do fluxo de comunicação em organizações dinâmicas de agentes. São Paulo, 1999. 141 p. MsC Disseratation-Escola Politécnica da Univers-dade de São Paulo.Google Scholar
- 8.KRAUS, S. Agents contracting tasks in non-collaborative environments. In: 11th National Conference on Artificial Intelligence. Washington, 1993. Proceedings. Menlo Park, AAAI Press, 1993. p. 243–248.Google Scholar
- 9.ROSENSCHEIN, J.; ZLOTKIN, G. Rules of Encounter: Designing Conventions for Automated Negotiation among Computers. Cambridge, MA, MIT Press, 1994.Google Scholar
- 10.SANDHOLM, T. Agents in Eletronic Commerce: Component Technologies for Automated Negotiation and Coalition Formation. In: 3rd International Conference on Multi-Agent Systems. Paris, 1998. Proceedings. Los Alamitos, IEEE Computer Society, 1998. p. 10–11.Google Scholar
- 11.SICHMAN, J.S.; DEMAZEAU, Y.; CONTE, R.; CASTELFRANCHI, C. A social reasoning mechanism based on dependence networks. In Michael Huhns and Munindar Singh, editors, Readings on Agents, pages 416–420, San Francisco, CA, 1998. Morgan Kaufmann Publishers Inc.Google Scholar
- 12.SICHMAN, J. S. Du Raisonnment Social Chez les Agents: Une Approche Fondée sur la Théorie de la Dépendance. Grenoble, 1995. 282 p. Phd Thesis-Institut National Polytechnique de Grenoble.Google Scholar
- 13.SICHMAN, J. S. DEPINT: Dependence-based coalition formation in an open multi-agent scenario. Journal of Artificial Societies and Social Simulation, 1(2), 1998. http://www.soc.surrey.ac.uk/JASSS/1/2/3.html.
- 15.TOKORO, M.. The society of objects. Technical report SCSL-TR-93-018, Sony Computer Science Laboratory Inc., Tokyo, Japan, December 1993.Google Scholar
- 16.WOOLDRIDGE, M.; JENNINGS, N.R. Towards a theory of cooperative problem solving. In Yves Demazeau, Jean-Pierre Müller, and John Perram, editors, Pre-proceedings of the 6th European Workshop on Modelling Autonomous Agents in a Multi-Agent World, pages 15–26, Odense, Denmark, August 1994.Google Scholar