CKBS ’90 pp 201-219 | Cite as

A Computational Model for Conflict Resolution in Cooperative Design Systems

  • Mark Klein
  • Arthur B. Baskin


Design of complex modern-day artifacts can be modelled as the cooperative activity of groups of design agents, each with their own areas of expertise. The interaction of such agents inevitably involves conflict. This paper presents a computational model for the resolution of such conflicts based on studies of human cooperative design. This model is based centrally on the insights that general conflict resolution expertise exists separately from domain-level design expertise, and that this expertise can be instantiated in the context of particular conflicts into specific advice for resolving those conflicts. Conflict resolution expertise consists of a taxonomy of design conflict classes in addition to associated general advice suitable for resolving conflicts in these classes. The abstract nature of conflict resolution expertise makes it applicable to a wide variety of design domains. This paper describes this conflict resolution model and provides examples of its operation from an implemented cooperative design system for local area network design that uses machine-based design agents.


Conflict Resolution Local Area Network Design Agent Conflict Class Conflict Resolution Strategy 
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. [Axelrod-84]
    Axelrod, R. The Evolution Of Cooperation, Basic Books, Inc. (1984).Google Scholar
  2. [Bezem-87]
    Bezem, M. Consistency Of Rule-Based Expert Systems. Tech. Report Centre for Mathematics and Computer Science, July 1987.Google Scholar
  3. [Brown-85]
    Brown, D.C. Failure Handling In A Design Expert System,Butterworth and Co. (November 1985).Google Scholar
  4. [Carey-88]
    Carey, J.M., Olson, D.L., and Paradice, D. Icrss: Interactive Conflict Resolution Support System For Inter-Group Situations. Proc 22nd Annual Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences 3(1988) Pps. 512–516.Google Scholar
  5. [Chang-87]
    Chang, E. Participant Systems For Cooperative Work,Morgan-Kaufman (1987) Pps. 311–339.Google Scholar
  6. [Clancey-84]
    Clancey, W.J. Classification Problem Solving. AAAI (1984) Pps. 49–55.Google Scholar
  7. [Coombs-88]
    Coombs, C.H. and Avrunin, G.S. The Structure of Conflict, Lawrence Erlbaum Associates (1988).Google Scholar
  8. [Descotte-85]
    Descotte, Y. and Latombe, J.C. Making Compromises Among Antagonist Constraints In A Planner. Artificial Intelligence 27(1985) Pps. 183–217.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. [Fedrizzi-88]
    Fedrizzi, M., Kacpryzk, J., and Zadrozny, S. An Interactive Multi-User Decision Support System For Consensus Reacing Process Using Fuzzy Logic With Linguistic Quantifiers,Elsevier Science Publishers, Vol. 4 (1988) Pps. 313–327.Google Scholar
  10. [Feldman-85]
    Feldman, D. A Taxonomy Of Intergroup Conflict Resolution Strategies. The 1985 Annual Conference on Developing Human Resources (1985).Google Scholar
  11. [Fisher-81]
    Fisher, R. and Ury, W. Getting to Yes: Negotiating Agreement Without Giving In,Houghtin Mifflin (1981).Google Scholar
  12. [Fox-84]
    Fox, M.S. and Smith, S.F. Isis - A Knowledge-Based System For Factory Scheduling. Expert Systems (July 1984).Google Scholar
  13. [Goldstein-75]
    Goldstein, I.P. Bargaining Between Goals. Tech. Report Massachusetts Institute of Technology Artificial Intelligence Laboratory, 1975.Google Scholar
  14. [Hale-87]
    Hale, H. and Haseman, H. EECS: A Prototype Distributed Executive Communication and Support System. Proceedings of the Twentieth Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences 1(1987) Pps. 557–565.Google Scholar
  15. [Hewitt-86]
    Hewitt, C. Offices Are Open Systems. ACM Transactions on Office Information Systems 4,3 (July 1986) Pps. 271–287.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. [Johansen-79]
    Johansen, J., Vallee, V., and Springer, S. Electronic Meetings: Technical Alternatives and Social Choices, Addison-Wesley (1979).Google Scholar
  17. [Klein-90a]
    Klein, M. Conflict Resolution in Cooperative Design, Ph.D. dissertation, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, January 1990.Google Scholar
  18. [Klein-90b]
    Klein, M. and Lu, S.C.Y. Conflict Resolution in Cooperative Design. International Journal for Artificial Intelligence in Engineering (1990).Google Scholar
  19. [Lander-88]
    Lander, S. and Lesser, V.R. Negotiation To Resolve Conflicts Among Design Experts. Tech. Report Dept of Computer and Information Science, August 1988.Google Scholar
  20. [Loy-87]
    Loy, L., Pracht, P., and Courtney, C. Effects of a Graphical Problem Solving Aid on Small Group Decision Making. Proc 20th Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences 1(1987) Pps. 566–574.Google Scholar
  21. [Loy-87]
    Marcus, S., Stout, J., and McDermott, J. VT: An Expert Elevator Designer. Artificial Intelligence Magazine 8, 4 (Winter 1987) Pps. 39–58.Google Scholar
  22. [Matwin-89]
    Matwin, S., Szpakowicz, S., Koperczak, Z., Kersten, G., and Michalowski, W. Negoplan: An Expert System Shell For Negotiation Support. Tech. Report University of Ottawa, February 1989.Google Scholar
  23. [Nguyen-85]
    Nguyen, T.A., Perkins, W.A., Laffey, T.J., and Pecora, D. Checking An Expert Sytems Knowledge Base For Consistency And Completeness. Proc IJCAI-85 (1985) Pps. 375–378.Google Scholar
  24. [Pferd-79]
    Pferd, P. and Peralta, P. Interactive Graphics Teleconferencing. IEEE Computer (November 1979).Google Scholar
  25. [Pruitt-81]
    Pruitt, D.G. Negotiation Behavior, Academic Pres (1981).Google Scholar
  26. [Reboh-83]
    Reboh, R. Extracting Useful Advice From Conflicting Expertise. Proceedings of the International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence 1(1983) Pps. 145–150.Google Scholar
  27. [Sarin-85]
    San, G. Computer-Based Real-Time Conferencing Systems. IEEE Computer (October 1985).Google Scholar
  28. [Stefik-81]
    Stefik, M.J. Planning With Constraints (Molgen: Part 1 & 2). Artificial Intelligence 16,2 (1981) Pps. 111–170.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. [Sussman-73]
    Sussman, G.J. A Computational Model Of Skill Acquistion. Tech. Report PhD Thesis. AI Lab, MIT, 1973., 1973.Google Scholar
  30. [Sussman-77]
    Sussman, G. Electrical Design - A Problem For Ai Research. Proceedings of the International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence (August 1977) Pps. 894–900.Google Scholar
  31. [Sussman-80]
    Sussman, G.J. and Steele, G.L. Constraints - A Language For Expressing Almost-Hierachical Descriptions. Artificial Intelligence 14(1980) Pps. 1–40.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. [Sussman-77]
    Suwa, M., Scott, A.C., and Shortliffe, E.H. An Approach To Verifying Completeness And Consistency In A Rule-Based Expert System. AAAI (1982).Google Scholar
  33. [Trice-89]
    Trice, A. and Davis, R. Consensus Knowledge Acquisition. Tech. Report Information Technologies Group, MTT School of Management, April 1989.Google Scholar
  34. [Wilensky-83]
    Wilensky, R. Planning And Understanding, Addison-Wesley (1983).Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag London Limited 1991

Authors and Affiliations

  • Mark Klein
    • 1
  • Arthur B. Baskin
    • 2
  1. 1.Advanced Research LabHitachi LtdHatoyama, SaitamaJapan
  2. 2.Dept. of Veterinary BiosciencesUniversity of IllinoisUrbanaUSA

Personalised recommendations