Skip to main content

Towards a Quantitative Concession-Based Classification Method of Negotiation Strategies

  • Conference paper
Agents in Principle, Agents in Practice (PRIMA 2011)

Part of the book series: Lecture Notes in Computer Science ((LNAI,volume 7047))

Abstract

In order to successfully reach an agreement in a negotiation, both parties rely on each other to make concessions. The willingness to concede also depends in large part on the opponent. A concession by the opponent may be reciprocated, but the negotiation process may also be frustrated if the opponent does not concede at all.

This process of concession making is a central theme in many of the classic and current automated negotiation strategies. In this paper, we present a quantitative classification method of negotiation strategies that measures the willingness of an agent to concede against different types of opponents. The method is then applied to classify some well-known negotiating strategies, including the agents of ANAC 2010. It is shown that the technique makes it easy to identify the main characteristics of negotiation agents, and can be used to group negotiation strategies into categories with common negotiation characteristics. We also observe, among other things, that different kinds of opponents call for a different approach in making concessions.

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

Access this chapter

Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 39.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 54.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight 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

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Axelrod, R.: The Evolution of Cooperation. Basic Books (1984)

    Google Scholar 

  2. Baarslag, T., Hindriks, K., Jonker, C.M., Kraus, S., Lin, R.: The first automated negotiating agents competition (ANAC 2010). In: Ito, T., Zhang, M., Robu, V., Fatima, S., Matsuo, T., Yamaki, H. (eds.) Innovations in Agent-Based Complex Automated Negotiations. SCI, vol. 319. Springer, Heidelberg (2010) (to appear)

    Google Scholar 

  3. Deutsch, M., Coleman, P.T., Marcus, E.C.: The Handbook of Conflict Resolution: Theory and Practice, 1st edn. Jossey-Bass (April 2000)

    Google Scholar 

  4. Faratin, P., Sierra, C., Jennings, N., Buckle, P.: Designing flexible automated negotiators: Concessions, trade-offs and issue changes. Tech. rep. (1999)

    Google Scholar 

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

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Fatima, S.S., Wooldridge, M.J., Jennings, N.R.: Optimal Negotiation Strategies for Agents with Incomplete Information. In: Meyer, J.-J.C., Tambe, M. (eds.) ATAL 2001. LNCS (LNAI), vol. 2333, pp. 377–392. Springer, Heidelberg (2002)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  7. Gode, D.K., Sunder, S.: Allocative efficiency in markets with zero intelligence (zi) traders: Market as a partial substitute for individual rationality. Journal of Political Economy 101(1), 119–137 (1993)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Hindriks, K.V., Tykhonov, D.: Towards a Quality Assessment Method for Learning Preference Profiles in Negotiation. In: Ketter, W., La Poutré, H., Sadeh, N., Shehory, O., Walsh, W. (eds.) AMEC 2008. LNBIP, vol. 44, pp. 46–59. Springer, Heidelberg (2010)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  9. Kersten, G., Noronha, S.: Rational agents, contract curves, and inefficient compromises report. Working papers, International Institute for Applied Systems Analysis (1997), http://econpapers.repec.org/RePEc:wop:iasawp:ir97050

  10. Kersten, G.E., Zhang, G.: Mining inspire data for the determinants of successful internet negotiations. InterNeg Research Papers INR 04/01 Central European Journal of Operational Research (2003)

    Google Scholar 

  11. Lai, H., Doong, H.S., Kao, C.C., Kersten, G.: Negotiators’ communication, perception of their counterparts, and performance in dyadic e-negotiations. Group Decision and Negotiation 15, 429–447 (2006)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Lewicki, R.J., Saunders, D.M., Minton, J.W.: Essentials of Negotiation. McGraw-Hill, Boston (2003)

    Google Scholar 

  13. Lin, R., Kraus, S., Tykhonov, D., Hindriks, K., Jonker, C.M.: Supporting the design of general automated negotiators. In: Proceedings of the Second International Workshop on Agent-based Complex Automated Negotiations, ACAN 2009 (2009)

    Google Scholar 

  14. Lin, R., Kraus, S., Wilkenfeld, J., Barry, J.: Negotiating with bounded rational agents in environments with incomplete information using an automated agent. Artificial Intelligence 172(6-7), 823–851 (2008)

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  15. Lomuscio, A., Wooldridge, M., Jennings, N.: A Classification Scheme for Negotiation in Electronic Commerce. In: Dignum, F., Sierra, C. (eds.) AgentLink 2000. LNCS (LNAI), vol. 1991, pp. 19–33. Springer, Heidelberg (2001)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  16. Pruitt, D.G.: Negotiation Behavior. Academic Press (1981)

    Google Scholar 

  17. Rubinstein, A.: Perfect equilibrium in a bargaining model. Econometrica 50(1), 97–109 (1982), http://www.jstor.org/stable/1912531

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  18. Sierra, C., Faratin, P., Jennings, N.: A service-oriented negotiation model between autonomous agents. In: Boman, M., Van de Velde, W. (eds.) MAAMAW 1997. LNCS (LNAI), vol. 1237, pp. 17–35. Springer, Heidelberg (1997)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  19. Thomas, K.W.: Conflict and conflict management: Reflections and update. Journal of Organizational Behavior 13(3), 265–274 (1992)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Wellman, M.P., Wurman, P.R., O’Malley, K., Bangera, R., de Lin, S., Reeves, D., Walsh, W.E.: Designing the market game for a trading agent competition. IEEE Internet Computing 5(2), 43–51 (2001)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Williams, C.R., Robu, V., Gerding, E.H., Jennings, N.R.: Using gaussian processes to optimise concession in complex negotiations against unknown opponents. In: Proceedings of the 22nd International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence. AAAI Press (January 2011)

    Google Scholar 

  22. Zachariassen, F.: Negotiation strategies in supply chain management. International Journal of Physical Distribution and Logistics Management 38, 764–781 (2008)

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2011 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg

About this paper

Cite this paper

Baarslag, T., Hindriks, K., Jonker, C. (2011). Towards a Quantitative Concession-Based Classification Method of Negotiation Strategies. In: Kinny, D., Hsu, J.Yj., Governatori, G., Ghose, A.K. (eds) Agents in Principle, Agents in Practice. PRIMA 2011. Lecture Notes in Computer Science(), vol 7047. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-25044-6_13

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-25044-6_13

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-642-25043-9

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-642-25044-6

  • eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics