Architectures for Negotiating Agents

  • Ronald Ashri
  • Iyad Rahwan
  • Michael Luck
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 2691)

Abstract

Automated negotiation is gaining interest, but issues relating to the construction of negotiating agent architectures have not been addressed sufficiently. Towards this end, we present a novel agent construction model that enables the development of a range of agent architectures based on a common set of building blocks. In this paper we identify the fundamental components needed for two generic classes of negotiating agents: simple negotiators and argumentative negotiators, and use our model to describe them. We demonstrate how the model allows us to reuse fundamental components across these negotiation architectures.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. [1]
    C. Bartolini, C. Preist, and N.R. Jennings. Architecting for reuse: A software framework for automated negotiation. In Proc. of AOSE-02, pages 87–98, 2002.Google Scholar
  2. [2]
    M. d’Inverno and M. Luck. Engineering AgentSpeak(L): A Formal Computational Model. Journal of Logic and Computation, 8(3):233–260, 1998.MATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. [3]
    M. d’Inverno and M. Luck. Understanding Agent Systems. Springer-Verlag, 2001.Google Scholar
  4. [4]
    P. Faratin. Automated Service Negotiation Between Autonomous Computational Agents. PhD thesis, UCL, Queen Mary and Westfield, Dept. of Electronic Engineering, 2000.Google Scholar
  5. [5]
    S. Fatima, M. Wooldridge, and N. R. Jennings. Multi-issue negotiation under time constraints. In C. Castelfranchi and L. Johnson, editors, Proc. of AAMAS-02, pages 143–150. ACM Press, 2002.Google Scholar
  6. [6]
    N.R. Jennings, P. Faratin, A. R. Lomuscio, S. Parsons, C. Sierra, and M. Wooldridge. Automated negotiation: prospects, methods and challenges. Int. Journal of Group Decision and Negotiation, 10(2):199–215, 2001.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. [7]
    N.R. Jennings, S. Parsons, P. Noriega, and C. Sierra. On argumentation-based negotiation. In Proc. of the Int. Workshop on Multi-Agent Systems, pages 1–7, Boston, USA, 1998.Google Scholar
  8. [8]
    S. Parsons, C. Sierra, and N. Jennings. Agents that reason and negotiate by arguing. Journal of Logic and Computation, 8(3):261–292, 1998.MATHCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  9. [9]
    H. Prakken and G. Vreeswijk. Logics for defeasible argumentation. In D. Gabbay and F. Guenthner, editors, Handbook of Philosophical Logic, volume 4, pages 219–318. Kluwer, 2nd edition, 2002.Google Scholar
  10. [10]
    I. Rahwan, L. Sonenberg, and F. Dignum. Towards interest-based negotiation. In Proc. of AAMAS-03 (to appear), Melbourne, Australia, 2003.Google Scholar
  11. [11]
    C. Sierra, N.R. Jennings, P. Noriega, and S. Parsons. A framework for argumentation-based negotiation. In M. Singh, A. Rao, and M. Wooldridge, editors, Intelligent Agent IV: Proc. of ATAL 1997, volume 1365 of LNCS, pages 177–192. Springer, 1998.Google Scholar
  12. [12]
    TAC. The Trading Agent Competition. World Wide Web, http://www.sics.se/tac/, 2003.
  13. [13]
    D.N. Walton and E.C.W. Krabbe. Commitment in Dialogue: Basic Concepts of Interpersonal Reasoning. SUNY Press, Albany, NY, USA, 1995.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2003

Authors and Affiliations

  • Ronald Ashri
    • 1
  • Iyad Rahwan
    • 2
  • Michael Luck
    • 1
  1. 1.Dept of Electronics and Computer ScienceSouthampton UniversitySouthamptonUK
  2. 2.Department of Information SystemsUniversity of MelbourneMelbourneAustralia

Personalised recommendations