Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Trends in Multiagent Negotiation: From Bilateral Bargaining to Consensus Policies

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Agreement Technologies

Part of the book series: Law, Governance and Technology Series ((LGTS,volume 8))

Abstract

Automated negotiation provides an important mechanism to reach agreements among distributed decision makers. It has been extensively studied from the perspective of e-commerce, though it can be seen from a more general perspective as a paradigm to solve coordination and cooperation problems in complex systems, e.g., task allocation, resource sharing, or surplus division. A variety of negotiation models have been proposed according to the many different parameters which may characterize a negotiation scenario. In this chapter, we briefly review the key concepts about multi-attribute negotiation and the most relevant works in the field, and then we focus on one of the more challenging topics on the field in the last few years, namely complex negotiations. In particular, we focus on situations where unanimous agreement is not possible or simply not desired, which is very common in negotiations involving complex, non-monotonic utility spaces. We describe a framework with which to perform multiagent negotiations where we can specify the type of agreements needed in terms of utility sharing among the agents. The proposed multi-round mediation process is based on the analysis of the agents’ offers at each negotiation round. At each round, the mediator applies Global Pattern Search (GPS) to the offers and then a linguistic expressed mediation rule based on Ordered Weighted Averaging Operators (OWA) that formalizes the consensus policy. At each round this mediation process generates a social contract that is submitted as feedback to the agents.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 129.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 169.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 169.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

References

  • Amgoud, L., S. Parsons, and N. Maudet. 2000. Arguments, dialogue and negotiation. In Proceedings of the European conference on artificial intelligence (ECAI-2000), Amsterdam, 338–342.

    Google Scholar 

  • Buttner, R. 2006. A classification structure for automated negotiations. In WI-IATW ’06: Proceedings of the 2006 IEEE/WIC/ACM international conference on web intelligence and intelligent agent technology, Washington, DC, 523–530.

    Google Scholar 

  • Choi, S.P.M., J. Liu, and S.-P. Chan. 2001. A genetic agent-based negotiation system. Computer Networks 37(2): 195–204. Electronic Business Systems.

    Google Scholar 

  • Clarke, E.H. 1971. Multipart pricing of public goods. Public Choice 11(1): 17–33.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • de la Hoz, E., M. Lopez-Carmona, M. Klein, and I. Marsa-Maestre. 2011. Consensus policy based multi-agent negotiation. In Agents in principle, agents in practice, Lecture notes in computer science, vol. 7047, ed. D. Kinny, J. Hsu, G. Governatori, and A. Ghose, 159–173. Berlin/Heidelberg: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Faratin, P., C. Sierra, and N.R. Jennings. 1998. Negotiation decision functions for autonomous agents. Robotics and Autonomous Systems 24(3–4): 159–182.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Faratin, P., C. Sierra, and N.R. Jennings. 2002. Using similarity criteria to make issue trade-offs in automated negotiations. Artificial Intelligence 142(2): 205–237.

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  • Fatima, S., M. Wooldridge, and N.R. Jennings. 2006. Multi-issue negotiation with deadlines. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 27: 381–417.

    MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Fatima, S., M. Wooldridge, and N.R. Jennings. 2009. An analysis of feasible solutions for multi-issue negotiation involving nonlinear utility functions. In AAMAS ’09: Proceedings of The 8th international conference on autonomous agents and multiagent systems, Richland, 1041–1048. International Foundation for Autonomous Agents and Multiagent Systems.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gatti, N., and F. Amigoni. 2005. An approximate pareto optimal cooperative negotiation model for multiple. In IAT ’05: Proceedings of the IEEE/WIC/ACM international conference on intelligent agent technology, 565–571. Washington, DC: IEEE Computer Society.

    Google Scholar 

  • Giovannucci, A., J. Cerquides, U. Endriss, and J. Rodríguez-Aguilar. 2010. A graphical formalism for mixed multi-unit combinatorial auctions. Autonomous Agents and Multi-Agent Systems 20: 342–368. doi:10.1007/s10458-009-9085-x.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Grabisch, M. 1997. k-order additive discrete fuzzy measures and their representation. Fuzzy Sets Systems 92(2): 167–189.

    Google Scholar 

  • Harsanyi, J.C. 2004. Games with incomplete information played by bayesian players. Management Science 50(12 Supplement): 1804–1817.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hindriks, K., C. Jonker, and D. Tykhonov. 2006. Eliminating interdependencies between issues for multi-issue negotiation. In Cooperative information agents X, Lecture notes in computer science, vol. 4149, 301–316. Berlin: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ito, T., M. Klein, and H. Hattori. 2008. A multi-issue negotiation protocol among agents with nonlinear utility functions. Journal of Multiagent and Grid Systems 4(1): 67–83.

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Jennings, N.R., S. Parsons, P. Noriega, and C. Sierra. 1998. On argumentation-based negotiation. In Proceedings of international workshop on multi-agent systems (IWMAS-1998), Dedham, 1–7.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jennings, N.R., P. Faratin, A.R. Lomuscio, S. Parsons, C. Sierra, and M. Wooldridge. 2001. Automated negotiation: Prospects, methods and challenges. International Journal of Group Decision and Negotiation 10(2): 199–215.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jonker, C., V. Robu, and J. Treur. 2007. An agent architecture for multi-attribute negotiation using incomplete preference information. Autonomous Agents and Multi-Agent Systems 15: 221–252. doi:10.1007/s10458-006-9009-y.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Keeney, R.L., and H. Raiffa. 1993. Decisions with multiple objectives-preferences and value tradeoffs. Cambridge University Press: Cambridge & New York, 569 pages, ISBN 0-521-44185-4 (hardback).

    Google Scholar 

  • Klein, M., P. Faratin, H. Sayama, and Y. Bar-Yam. 2003. Protocols for negotiating complex contracts. IEEE Intelligent Systems 18(6): 32–38.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kraus, S. 2001. Automated negotiation and decision making in multiagent environments. In Mutli-agents systems and applications, 150–172. New York: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kraus, S. 2001. Strategic negotiation in multiagent environments. Cambridge: MIT.

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Lai, G., and K. Sycara. 2009. A generic framework for automated multi-attribute negotiation. Group Decision and Negotiation 18: 169–187.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lai, G., C. Li, K. Sycara, and J. Giampapa. 2004. Literature review on multiattribute negotiations. Technical report CMU-RI-TR-04-66, Robotics Institute, Carnegie Mellon University, Pittsburgh.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lai, G., C. Li, and K. Sycara. 2006. Efficient multi-attribute negotiation with incomplete information. Group Decision and Negotiation 15(5): 511–528.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lau, R.Y., M. Tang, and O. Wong. 2004. Towards genetically optimised responsive negotiation agents. In Proceedings of the IEEE/WIC/ACM international conference on intelligent agent technology (IAT’04), Beijing, ed. I.C. Society, 295–301, September 20–24 2004. Los Alamitos: IEEE Computer Society.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lin, M.-W. 2004. Modeling agent negotiation via fuzzy constraints in e-business. Computational Intelligence 20: 624–642.

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  • López-Carmona, M.A., and J.R. Velasco. 2006. An expressive approach to fuzzy constraint based agent purchase negotiation. In Proceedings of the international joint conference on autonomous agents and multi-agent systems (AAMAS-2006), 429–431, Hakodate.

    Google Scholar 

  • López-Carmona, M.A., J.R. Velasco, and I. Marsa-Maestre. 2007. The agents’ attitudes in fuzzy constraint based automated purchase negotiations. In Multi-agent systems and applications V, Lecture Notes in artificial intelligence, vol. 4696, 246–255. Berlin: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • López-Carmona, M.A., I. Marsá-Maestre, M. Klein, and T. Ito. 2012. Addressing stability issues in mediated complex contract negotiations for constraint-based, non-monotonic utility spaces. Autonomous Agents and Multi-Agent Systems 24(3): 485–535.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Luo, X., N.R. Jennings, N. Shadbolt, Ho-Fung-Leung, and J.H.M. Lee. 2003. A fuzzy constraint based model for bilateral, multi-issue negotiations in semi-competitive environments. Artificial Intelligence 148(1–2): 53–102.

    Google Scholar 

  • Luo, X., J.H. Lee, H.F. Leung, and N.R. Jennings. 2003. Prioritised fuzzy constraint satisfaction problems: Axioms, instantiation and validation. Fuzzy Sets and Systems 136(2):151–188.

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Osborne, M., and A. Rubinstein. 1990. Bargaining and markets. San Diego: Academic.

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Parkes, D.C. and J. Kalagnanam. 2005. Models for iterative multiattribute procurement auctions. Management Science 51(3): 435–451.

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Rahwan, I., S.D. Ramchurn, N.R. Jennings, P. Mcburney, S. Parsons, and L. Sonenberg. 2003. Argumentation-based negotiation. The Knowledge Engineering Review 18(4): 343–375.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rahwan, I., L. Sonenberg, N.R. Jennings, and P. McBurney. 2007. Stratum: A methodology for designing heuristic agent negotiation strategies. Applied Artificial Intelligence 21(6): 489–527.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Robu, V., D.J.A. Somefun, and J.A. La Poutré. 2005. Modeling complex multi-issue negotiations using utility graphs. In AAMAS ’05: Proceedings of the fourth international joint conference on Autonomous agents and multiagent systems, 280–287. New York: ACM.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ros, R., and C. Sierra. 2006. A negotiation meta strategy combining trade-off and concession moves. Autonomous Agents and Multi-Agent Systems 12(2): 63–181.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rosenschein, J.S., and G. Zlotkin. 1994. Rules of encounter. Cambridge: MIT.

    Google Scholar 

  • Teich, J.E., H. Wallenius, J. Wallenius, and A. Zaitsev. 1999. A multiple unit auction algorithm: Some theory and a web implementation. Electronic Markets 9(3): 199–205.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Teich, J.E., H. Wallenius, J. Wallenius, and A. Zaitsev. 2006. A multi-attribute e-auction mechanism for procurement: Theoretical foundations. European Journal of Operational Research 175(1): 90–100.

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Xia, M., J. Stallaert, A.B. Whinston. 2005. Solving the combinatorial double auction problem. European Journal of Operational Research 164(1): 239–251.

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Yager, R. 2007. Multi-agent negotiation using linguistically expressed mediation rules. Group Decision and Negotiation 16(1): 1–23.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Yager, R., and Kacprzyk, J. 1997. The ordered weighted averaging operators: Theory and applications. Boston: Kluwer Academic.

    Book  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Computer Engineering Department, Universidad de Alcalá, Escuela Politécnica, 28871, Alcalá de Henares (Madrid), Spain

    Enrique de la Hoz, Miguel A. López-Carmona & Iván Marsá-Maestre

Authors
  1. Enrique de la Hoz
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Miguel A. López-Carmona
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Iván Marsá-Maestre
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Enrique de la Hoz .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Room DI-241, University Rey Juan, Calle Tulipan s/n, Madrid/Mostoles, 28933, Spain

    Sascha Ossowski

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2013 Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht.

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

de la Hoz, E., López-Carmona, M.A., Marsá-Maestre, I. (2013). Trends in Multiagent Negotiation: From Bilateral Bargaining to Consensus Policies. In: Ossowski, S. (eds) Agreement Technologies. Law, Governance and Technology Series, vol 8. Springer, Dordrecht. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-007-5583-3_22

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-007-5583-3_22

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Dordrecht

  • Print ISBN: 978-94-007-5582-6

  • Online ISBN: 978-94-007-5583-3

  • eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation