Data Brokers: Building Collections through Automated Negotiation

  • Fillia Makedon
  • Song Ye
  • Sheng Zhang
  • James Ford
  • Li Shen
  • Sarantos Kapidakis
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 3025)


Collecting digital materials is time-consuming and can gain from automation. Since each source – and even each acquisition – may involve a separate negotiation of terms, a collector may prefer to use a broker to represent his interests with owners. This paper describes the Data Broker Framework (DBF), which is designed to automate the process of digital object acquisition. For each acquisition, a negotiation agent is assigned to negotiate on the collector’s behalf, choosing from strategies in a strategy pool to automatically handle most bargaining cases and decide what to accept and what counteroffers to propose. We introduce NOODLE (Negotiation OntOlogy Description LanguagE) to formally specify terms in the negotiation domain.


Digital Library Negotiation Process Negotiation System Negotiation Strategy Negotiation Activity 
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. 1.
    Beam, C., Segev, A.: Automated Negotiations: A Survey of the State of the Art (1997)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Kraus, S.: Negotiation in multiagent environments. The MIT Press, Cambridge (2001)zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Ye, S., et al.: SCENS: A system for the mediated sharing of sensitive data. In: Third ACM+IEEE Joint Conference on Digital Libraries (JCDL 2003), Houston, TX (2003)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
  5. 5.
    Makedon, F., et al.: MetaDL: A digital library of metadata for sensitive or complex research data. In: Agosti, M., Thanos, C. (eds.) ECDL 2002. LNCS, vol. 2458, p. 374. Springer, Heidelberg (2002)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Bartolini, C., Jennings, C.P.N.: A generic software framework for automated negotiation. In: First International Conference on Autonomous Agent and Multi-Agent Systems (2002)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Lomuscio, A., Wooldridge, M., Jennings, N.: A Classification Scheme for Negotiation in Electronic Commerce. In: Sierra, C., Dignum, F.P.M. (eds.) AgentLink 2000. LNCS (LNAI), vol. 1991, p. 19. Springer, Heidelberg (2001)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Tamma, V., Wooldridge, M., Dickinson, I.: An ontology for automated negotiation. In: The AAMAS 2002 workshop on Ontologies in Agent Systems (OAS 2002), Bologna, Italy (2002)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Grosof, B., Poon, T.: SweetDeal: Representing Agent Contracts with Exceptions using XML Rules, Ontologies, and Process Descriptions. In: WWW 2003, ACM Press, Budapest (2003)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Gilad, Z., Rosenschein, J.S.: Mechanisms for Automated Negotiation in State Oriented Domains. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 5 (1996)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Zeng, D., Sycara, K.: Bayesian learning in negotiation. International Journal of Human-Computer Studies 48, 125–141 (1998)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Kowalczyk, R., Bui, V.: On fuzzy e-negotiation agents: Autonomous negotiation with incomplete and imprecise information. In: DEXA Workshop 2000 (2000)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Governatori, G., ter Hofstede, A.H.M., Oaks, P.: Defeasible logic for automated negotiation. In: Fifth CollECTeR Conference on Electronic Commerce, Deakin University, Burwood, Victoria, Australia (2000)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Matwin, S., Szapiro, T., Haigh, K.: Genetic algorithms approach to a negotiation support system. IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics 21 (1991)Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Capron, L.: The Long-term performance of horizontal acquisitions. Strategic Management Journal 20, 987–1018 (1999)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Hayward, M.L.A.: When do firms learn from their acquisitions experience? Evidence from 1990-1995. Strategic Management Journal (23), 21–39 (2002)Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Kraus, S.: Negotiation and cooperation in multi-agent environments. Artificial Intelligence 94(1-2), 79–98 (1997)zbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Arizona Health Sciences Library, Collection Development Policy for Electronic ResourcesGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
  20. 20.
    Wang, Y., et al.: A system framework for the integration and analysis of multi-modal spatio- temporal data streams: A case study in MS lesion analysis. In: EMBS IEEE 29th Annual Northeast Bioengineering Conference, Capri, Italy (2003)Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Makedon, F., et al.: Multi-functional data collection interfaces for biomedical research collaboration. In: Human Computer Interaction (HCI), Crete (2003)Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Steinberg, T., et al.: A spatio-temporal multi-modal data management and analysis environment: A case study in MS lesions. In: 15th International Conference on Scientific and Statistic Database Management (SSDBM), Cambridge, MA (2003)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2004

Authors and Affiliations

  • Fillia Makedon
    • 1
  • Song Ye
    • 1
  • Sheng Zhang
    • 1
  • James Ford
    • 1
  • Li Shen
    • 1
  • Sarantos Kapidakis
    • 2
  1. 1.Department of Computer ScienceThe Dartmouth Experimental Visualization Laboratory (DEVLAB) 
  2. 2.Department of Archive and Library SciencesIonian UniversityGreece

Personalised recommendations