Prob-Cog: An Adaptive Filtering Model for Trust Evaluation

  • Zeinab Noorian
  • Stephen Marsh
  • Michael Fleming
Part of the IFIP Advances in Information and Communication Technology book series (IFIPAICT, volume 358)


Trust and reputation systems are central for resisting against threats from malicious agents in decentralized systems. In previous work we have introduced the Prob-Cog model of multi-layer filtering for consumer agents in e-marketplaces which provide mechanisms for identifying participants who disseminate unfair ratings by cognitively eliciting the behavioural characteristics of e-marketplace agents. We have argued that the notion of unfairness does not exclusively refer to deception but can also imply differences in dispositions. The proposed filtering approach goes beyond the inflexible judgements on the quality of participants and instead allows environmental circumstances and the human dispositions that we call optimism, pessimism and realism to be incorporated into our trustworthiness evaluation procedures. In this paper we briefly outline the two layers before providing a detailed exposition of our experimental results, comparing Prob-Cog to FIRE and the personalized approach under various attacks and normal situations.


Multiagent System Trust Evaluation Personalized Approach Reputation System Consumer Agent 
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.


  1. 1.
    Barber, K., Fullam, K., Kim, J.: Challenges for trust, fraud and deception research in multi-agent systems. In: Falcone, R., Barber, S.K., Korba, L., Singh, M.P. (eds.) AAMAS 2002. LNCS (LNAI), vol. 2631, pp. 8–14. Springer, Heidelberg (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Castelfranchi, C., Falcone, R., Piunti, M.: Agents with anticipatory behaviors: To be cautious in a risky environment. In: ECAI (2006)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Huynh, T.D., Jennings, N.R., Shadbolt, N.R.: An integrated trust and reputation model for open multi-agent systems. In: AAMAS, pp. 119–154 (2006)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Falcone, R., Castelfranchi, C.: Generalizing trust: Inferencing trustworthiness from categories. In: AAMAS-TRUST, pp. 65–80 (2008)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Hang, C.-W., Wang, Y., Singh, M.P.: An adaptive probabilistic trust model and its evaluation. In: AAMAS, vol. 3, pp. 1485–1488 (2008)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Kerr, R., Cohen, R.: Smart cheaters do prosper: defeating trust and reputation systems. In: AAMAS, vol. 2, pp. 993–1000 (2009)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Noorian, Z., Marsh, S., Fleming, M.: Multi-layer cognitive filtering by behavioral modeling. In: Proceedings of the 10th International Conference on Autonomous Agents and Multiagent Systems (AAMAS 2011), Taipei, Taiwan, May 2-6, pp. 871–878. ACM, New York (2011)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Noorian, Z., Ulieru, M.: The state of the art in trust and reputation systems: A framework for comparison. J. Theor. Appl. Electron. Commer. JTAER 5(2), 97–117 (2010)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Jøsang, A., Ismail, R.: The Beta reputation system. In: Proceedings of the 15th Bled Electronic Commerce Conference (2002)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Teacy, W.T.L., Patel, J., Jennings, N.R., Luck, M.: TRAVOS: Trust and reputation in the context of inaccurate information sources. Journal of Autonomous Agents and Multi-Agent Systems (2006)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Wang, Y., Vassileva, J.: Bayesian network-based trust model. Web Intelligence, 372–378 (2003)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Wang, Y., Singh, M.P.: Formal trust model for multiagent systems. In: IJCAI (2007)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Xiong, L., Liu, L.: PeerTrust: Supporting reputation-based trust for peer-to-peer electronic communities. IEEE Transactions on Knowledge and Data Engineering 16, 843–857 (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Yu, B., Singh, M.P.: Detecting deception in reputation management. In: AAMAS 2003: Proceedings of the second international joint conference on Autonomous agents and multiagent systems, pp. 73–80 (2003)Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Zhang, J., Cohen, R.: Evaluating the trustworthiness of advice about seller agents in e-marketplaces: A personalized approach. Journal of Electronic Commerce Research and Applications (2008)Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Zviling, M., Leonov, H., Arkin, I.T.: Genetic algorithm-based optimization of hydrophobicity tables. Bioinformatics 21(11), 2651–2656 (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© International Federation for Information Processing 2011

Authors and Affiliations

  • Zeinab Noorian
    • 1
  • Stephen Marsh
    • 2
  • Michael Fleming
    • 1
  1. 1.University of New BrunswickCanada
  2. 2.Communications Research CentreCanada

Personalised recommendations