Improving Multi-agent Negotiations Using Multi-Objective PSO Algorithm
Negotiation over limited resources, as a way for the agents to reach agreement, is one of the significant topics in Multi-Agent Systems (MASs). Most of the models proposed for negotiation suffer from different limitations in the number of the negotiation parties and issues as well as some constraining assumptions such as availability of unlimited computational resources and complete information about the participants. In this paper we make an attempt to ease the limitations specified above by means of a distributive agent based mechanism underpinned by Multi-Objective Swarm Optimization (MOPSO), as a fast and effective learning technique to handle the complexity and dynamics of the real-world negotiations. The experimental results of the proposed method reveal its effectiveness and high performance in presence of limited computational resources and tough deadlines.
KeywordsNegotiation Multi-Agent Systems Multi-Objective Particle Swarm Optimization PSO
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
- 1.Sycara, K.: Multi-agent compromise via negotiation. In: Gasser, L., Huhns, M. (eds.) Distributed Artificial Intelligence II, pp. 119–139. Morgan Kaufmann, San Francisco (1989)Google Scholar
- 4.Pruitt, D.: Negotiation Behaviour. Academic Press, London (1981)Google Scholar
- 6.von Neumann, J., Morgenstern, O.: The Theory of Games and Economic Behaviour. Princeton University Press, Princeton (1994)Google Scholar
- 7.Fatima, S., Wooldridge, M., Jennings, N.R.: Comparing Equilibria for Game-Theoretic and Evolutionary Bargaining Models. In: Proceedings of the International Workshop on Agent-Mediated Electronic Commerce V, Melbourne, Australia, pp. 70–77 (2003)Google Scholar
- 12.Kennedy, J., Eberhart, R.C.: Particle Swarm Optimization. In: Proc. of IEEE Int. Conf. on Neural Networks, Piscataway, NJ, pp. 1942–1948 (1995)Google Scholar
- 13.Alvarez-Benitez, J.E., Everson, R.M., Fieldsend, J.E.: A MOPSO algorithm based exclusively on Pareto dominance concepts. In: Coello Coello, C.A., Hernández Aguirre, A., Zitzler, E. (eds.) EMO 2005. LNCS, vol. 3410, pp. 459–473. Springer, Heidelberg (2005)Google Scholar
- 14.Rosenschein, J., Zlotkin, G.: Task oriented domains. In: Rules of Encounter: Designing Conventions for Automated Negotiation among Computers, pp. 29–52. MIT Press, Cambridge (1994)Google Scholar
- 17.Raiffa, H.: The Art and Science of Negotiation. Harvard University Press, Cambridge (1982)Google Scholar