Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Negotiation among autonomous computational agents: principles, analysis and challenges

  • Published:
Artificial Intelligence Review Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Automated negotiation systems with software agents representing individuals or organizations and capable of reaching agreements through negotiation are becoming increasingly important and pervasive. Examples, to mention a few, include the industrial trend toward agent-based supply chain management, the business trend toward virtual enterprises, and the pivotal role that electronic commerce is increasingly assuming in many organizations. Artificial intelligence (AI) researchers have paid a great deal of attention to automated negotiation over the past decade and a number of prominent models have been proposed in the literature. These models exhibit fairly different features, make use of a diverse range of concepts, and show performance characteristics that vary significantly depending on the negotiation context. As a consequence, assessing and relating individual research contributions is a difficult task. Currently, there is a need to build a framework to define and characterize the essential features that are necessary to conduct automated negotiation and to compare the usage of key concepts in different publications. Furthermore, the development of such a framework can be an important step to identify the core elements of autonomous negotiating agents, to provide a coherent set of concepts related to automated negotiation, to assess progress in the field, and to highlight new research directions. Accordingly, this paper introduces a generic framework for automated negotiation. It describes, in detail, the components of the framework, assesses the sophistication of the majority of work in the AI literature on these components, and discusses a number of prominent models of negotiation. This paper also highlights some of the major challenges for future automated negotiation research.

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

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Amgoud L, Maudet N, Parsons S (2000a) Modeling dialogues using argumentation. In: 4th international conference on multi-agent systems. IEEE Computer Society Press, pp 31–38

  • Amgoud L, Parsons S, Maudet N (2000b) Arguments, dialogue, and negotiation. In: 14th European conference on artificial intelligence. IOS Press, pp 338–342

  • Bartolini C, Preist C, Jennings N et al (2005) A software framework for automated negotiation. In: Choren R (eds) Software engineering for multi-agent systems III: research issues and practical applications. Springer, Heidelberg, pp 213–235 (LNCS 3390)

    Google Scholar 

  • Bazerman M, Neale M (1992) Negotiating rationality. Free Press, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Bazerman M, Russ L, Yakura E (1987) Post-settlement settlements in two-party negotiations. Negot J 3: 283–292

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bazerman M, Mannix E, Thompson L (1988) Groups as mixed-motive negotiations. In: Lawler E, Markovsky B (eds) Advances in group processes, vol 5. JAI Press, London, pp 195–216

    Google Scholar 

  • Brett J (1991) Negotiating group decision. Negot J 7: 291–310

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bussmann S, Jennings N, Wooldridge M (2004) Multiagent systems for manufacturing control. Springer, Heidelberg

    Google Scholar 

  • Butler J (1999) Trust expectations, information sharing, climate of trust, and negotiation effectiveness and efficiency. Group Organ Manag 24: 217–238

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Carnevale P (1994) Negotiation. In: Ramachandran V (eds) Encyclopedia of human behavior, vol 3. Academic Press, New York, pp 271–281

    Google Scholar 

  • Carnevale P, Pruitt D (1992) Negotiation and mediation. In: Rosenzweig M, Porter L (eds) Annual review of psychology, vol 43. Annual Reviews Inc., Palo Alto, pp 531–581

    Google Scholar 

  • Castelfranchi C (2000) Conflict ontology. In: Müller H, Dieng R (eds) Computational conflicts. Springer, Heidelberg, pp 21–40

    Google Scholar 

  • Chaiken S, Gruenfeld D, Judd C (2000) Persuasion in negotiations and conflict situations. In: The handbook of conflict resolution: theory and practice. Jossey-Bass, San Francisco, pp 144–165

  • Coehoorn R, Jennings N (2004) Learning an opponent’s preferences to make effective multi-issue negotiation trade-offs. In: 6th International conference on e-commerce. ACM Press, New York, pp 59–68

  • Deutsch M (1994) Constructive conflict resolution: principles, training and research. J Soc Issues 50: 13–32

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • De Dreu C, Weingart L, Kwon S (2000) Influence of social motives on integrative negotiation: a meta-analytic view and test of two theories. J Pers Soc Psychol 78: 889–905

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ehtamo H, Verkama M, Hämäläinen R (1999) How to select fair improving directions in a negotiation model over continuous issues. IEEE Trans Syst Man Cybern C Appl Rev 29: 26–33

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ehtamo H, Hämäläinen R, Heiskanen P, Teich J, Verkama M, Zionts S (1999) Generating Pareto solutions in a two-party setting: constraint proposal methods. Manag Sci 45: 1697–1709

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ehtamo H, Kettunen E, Hämäläinen R (2001) Searching for joint gains in multi-party negotiations. Eur J Oper Res 130: 54–69

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Excelente-Toledo C, Bourne R, Jennings N (2001) Reasoning about commitments and penalties for coordination between autonomous agents. In: 5th international conference on autonomous agents. ACM Press, New York, pp 131–138

  • Faratin P (2000) Automated service negotiation between autonomous computational agents. Dissertation, Queen Mary & Westfield College, London

    Google Scholar 

  • Faratin P, Sierra C, Jennings N (1998) Negotiation decision functions for autonomous agents. J Robot Auton Syst 24: 159–182

    Article  Google Scholar 

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

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  • Fasli M (2007) Agent technology for e-commerce. Wiley, Chichester

    Google Scholar 

  • Fatima S, Wooldridge M, Jennings N (2005) A comparative study of game theoretic and evolutionary models of bargaining for software agents. Artif Intell Rev 23: 185–203

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fisher R, Ury W (1981) Getting to yes: negotiating agreement without giving in. Arrow Books Limited, London

    Google Scholar 

  • Fisher R, Ertel D (1995) Getting ready to negotiate: the getting to yes workbook. Penguin Books, London

    Google Scholar 

  • Fox J, Krause P, Ambler S (1992) Arguments, contradictions, and practical reasoning. In: 10th european conference on artificial intelligence. Wiley, Chichester, pp 623–627

  • Fox M, Barbuceanu M, Teigen R (2000) Agent-oriented supply chain management. Int J Flex Manuf Syst 12: 165–188

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Garrido L, Sycara K (1996) Multi-agent meeting scheduling: preliminary experimental results. In: 2nd International conference on multi-agent systems, AAAI Press, pp 95–102

  • Gerding E, Poutré H (2006) Bilateral bargaining with multiple opportunities: knowing your opponent’s bargaining position. IEEE Trans Syst Man Cybern C 36: 45–55

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gerding E, Bragt D, Poutré H (2003) Multi-issue negotiation processes by evolutionary simulation, validation and social extensions. Comput Econ 22: 39–63

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Giunchiglia F, Serafini L (1994) Multilanguage hierarchical logics, or: how we can do without modal logics. Artif Intell 65: 29–70

    Article  MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  • Gordon T, Karacapilidis N (1997) The Zeno argumentation framework. In: 6th international conference on AI and law, ACM Press, New York, pp 10–18

  • Greenhalgh L (2001) Managing strategic relationships. Free Press, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • He M, Jennings N, Leung H-F (2003) On agent-mediated electronic commerce. IEEE Trans Knowl Data Eng 15: 985–1003

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Heiskanen H, Ehtamo P, Hämäläinen R (2001) Constraint proposal method for computing Pareto solutions in multi-party negotiations. Eur J Oper Res 133: 44–61

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Holmes M (1992) Phase structures in negotiation. In: Putnam L, Roloff M (eds) Communication and negotiation. Sage, London, pp 83–105

    Google Scholar 

  • Jennings N, Sycara K, Wooldridge M (1998) A roadmap of agent research and development. Auton Agent Multi Agent Syst 1: 275–306

    Google Scholar 

  • Jennings N, Faratin P, Lomuscio A, Parsons S, Wooldridge M, Sierra C (2001) Automated negotiation: prospects, methods and challenges. Group Decis Negot 10: 199–215

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jung H, Tambe M, Kulkarni S (2001) Argumentation as distributed constraint satisfaction. In: 5th International Conference on Autonomous Agents. ACM Press, New York, pp 324–331

  • Karunatillake N, Jennings N (2005) Is it worth arguing? In: 1st international workshop on argumentation in multi-agent systems. Springer, Heidelberg, pp 234–250 (LNAI 3366)

  • Kelley H (1966) A classroom study of the Dilemmas in interpersonal negotiation. In: Archibald K (eds) Strategic interaction and conflict: original papers and discussion. University of California Press, Berkeley, pp 49–73

    Google Scholar 

  • Keough C (1992) Bargaining arguments and argumentative bargainers. In: Putnam L, Roloff M (eds) Communication and negotiation. Sage, London, pp 109–127

    Google Scholar 

  • Kersten G, Lai H (2007) Negotiation support and e-negotiation systems: an overview. Group Decis Negot 16: 553–586

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Klein M (1991) Supporting conflict resolution in cooperative design systems. IEEE Trans Syst Man Cybern 21: 1379–1390

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Klein M, Faratin P, Sayama H, Bar-Yam Y (2003) Negotiating complex contracts. Group Decis Negot 12: 111–125

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kramer R (1991) The more the merrier? Social psychological aspects of multiparty negotiations in organizations. In: Bazerman M, Lewicki R, Sheppard B (eds) Research on negotiation in organizations, vol 3. JAI Press, London, pp 307–332

    Google Scholar 

  • Kraus S (2001) Strategic negotiation in multi-agent environments. MIT Press, Cambridge

    Google Scholar 

  • Kraus S, Wilkenfeld J, Zlotkin G (1995) Multiagent negotiation under time constraints. Artif Intell 75: 297–345

    Article  MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  • Kraus S, Sycara S, Evenchik A (1998) Reaching agreements through argumentation: a logical model and implementation. Artif Intell 104: 1–69

    Article  MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  • Krause P, Ambler S, Elvang Gransson M, Fox J (1995) A logic of argumentation for reasoning under uncertainty. Comput Intell 11: 113–131

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kressel K, Pruitt D (1989) Mediation research. Jossey-Bass, San Francisco

    Google Scholar 

  • Lander S (1994) Distributed search and conflict management among reusable heterogeneous agents. Dissertation, University of Massachusetts at Amherst, USA

  • Lander S, Lesser V (1997) Sharing metainformation to guide cooperative search among heterogeneous reusable agents. IEEE Trans Knowl Data Eng 9: 193–207

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lewicki R, Saunders D, Minton J (1999) Negotiation: readings, exercises, and cases. McGraw Hill, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Lewicki R, Barry B, Saunders D, Minton J (2003) Negotiation. McGraw Hill, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Li C, Giampapa J, Sycara K (2004) Bilateral negotiation decisions with uncertain dynamic outside options. In: 1st international workshop on electronic contracting, IEEE Computer Society Press, pp 54–61

  • Li C, Giampapa J, Sycara K (2006) Bilateral negotiation decisions with uncertain dynamic outside options. IEEE Trans Syst Man Cybern C 36: 31–44

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Loewenstein J, Thompson L, Gentner D (1999) Analogical encoding facilities knowledge transfer in negotiation. Psychon Bull Rev 6: 586–597

    Google Scholar 

  • Lomuscio A, Wooldridge M, Jennings N (2003) A classification scheme for negotiation in electronic commerce. Group Decis Negot 12: 31–56

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lopes F, Mamede N, Novais AQ, Coelho H (2002) A negotiation model for autonomous computational agents: formal description and empirical evaluation. J Intell Fuzzy Syst 12: 195–212

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Lopes F, Mamede N, Novais AQ, Coelho H (2004) Negotiation strategies for autonomous computational agents. In: 16th European conference on artificial intelligence (ECAI-04). IOS Press, pp 38–42

  • Lopes F, Mamede N, Novais AQ, Coelho H (2005) Negotiation among autonomous agents: experimental evaluation of integrative strategies. In: 12th Portuguese conference on artificial intelligence. IEEE Computer Society Press, pp 280–288

  • Lovenheim P (1989) Mediate, don’t litigate: how to resolve disputes quickly, privately, and inexpensively without going to court. McGraw Hill, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Maes P, Guttman R, Moukas A (1999) Agents that buy and sell. Commun ACM 42: 81–91

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Malsch T, Weiss G (2000) Conflicts in social theory and multiAgent systems: on importing sociological insights into distributed AI. In: Tessier C, Chaudron L, Müller H (eds) Conflicting agents: conflict management in multi-agent systems. Kluwer, Boston, pp 111–149

    Google Scholar 

  • Matos N, Sierra C, Jennings N (1998) Determining successful negotiation strategies. In: 3rd international conference on multi-agent systems. IEEE Computer Society Press, pp 182–189

  • McGillicuddy N, Welton G, Pruitt D (1987) Third party intervention: a field experiment comparing three different models. J Person Soc Psychol 53: 104–112

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Moore C (1996) The mediation process: practical strategies for resolving conflict. Jossey-Bass, San Francisco

    Google Scholar 

  • Morley I, Stephenson G (1977) The social psychology of bargaining. Allen and Unwin, London

    Google Scholar 

  • Müller H (1996a) Negotiation principles. In: O’Hare G, Jennings N (eds) Foundations of distributed artificial intelligence. Wiley, Chichester, pp 211–299

    Google Scholar 

  • Müller J (1996b) The design of intelligent agents. Springer, Heidelberg

    Google Scholar 

  • Nadler J, Thompson L, Van Boven L (2003) Learning negotiation skills: four models of knowledge creation and transfer. Manag Sci 49: 529–540

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nguyen T, Jennings N (2003) A heuristic model for concurrent bi-lateral negotiations in incomplete information settings. In: 18th international joint conference on artificial intelligence. Morgan Kaufmann Publishers, San Mateo, pp 1467–1469

  • Nguyen T, Jennings N (2004) Coordinating multiple concurrent negotiations. In: 3rd international conference on autonomous agents and multi agent systems. ACM Press, New York, pp 1062–1069

  • Nguyen T, Jennings N (2005) Managing commitments in multiple concurrent negotiations. Electron Commer Res Appl 4: 362–376

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Olekalns M, Smith P, Walsh T (1996) The process of negotiating: strategy and timing as predictors of outcomes. Organ Behav Hum Decis Process 68: 68–77

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Oliver J (1997) A machine-learning approach to automated negotiation and prospects for electronic commerce. J Manag Inf Syst 13: 83–112

    Google Scholar 

  • Osborne M, Rubinstein A (1990) Bargaining and markets. Academic Press, San Diego

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Osborne M (2004) Introduction to game theory. Oxford University Press, Oxford

    Google Scholar 

  • Parsons S, Jennings N (1996) Negotiation through argumentation—a preliminary report. In: 2nd International Conference on Multi-Agent Systems. AAAI Press, pp 267–274

  • Parsons S, McBurney P (2003) Argumentation-based dialogues for agent co-ordination. Group Decis Negot 12: 415–439

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Parsons S, Sierra C, Jennings N (1998) Agents that reason and negotiate by arguing. J Log Comput 8: 261–292

    Article  MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  • Prasad M, Lesser V, Lander S (1998) Learning organizational roles for negotiated search in a multiagent system. Int J Hum Comp Stud 48: 51–67

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Prakken H, Vreeswijk G (2002) Logics for defeasible argumentation. In: Gabbay D, Guenthner F (eds) Handbook of philosophical logic. Kluwer, Boston, pp 218–319

    Google Scholar 

  • Pruitt D (1981) Negotiation behavior. Academic Press, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Pruitt D (1998) Social conflict. In: Gilbert D, Fiske S, Lindzei G (eds) The handbook of social psychology, vol 2. McGraw-Hill, New York, pp 470–503

    Google Scholar 

  • Pruitt D, Rubin J (1986) Social conflict: escalation, stalemate and settlement. McGraw Hill, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Pruitt D, Carnevale P (1993) Negotiation in social conflict. Open University Press, Philadelphia

    Google Scholar 

  • Pruitt D, Kim S (2004) Social conflict: escalation, stalemate, and settlement. McGraw Hill, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Putnam L (1990) Reframing integrative and distributive bargaining. In: Shepard B, Bazerman M, Lewicki R (eds) Research on negotiation in organizations, vol 2. JAI Press, London, pp 3–30

    Google Scholar 

  • Putnam L, Wilson S, Turner D (1990) The evolution of policy arguments in teacher’s negotiations. Argumentation 4: 129–152

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rahwan I, Ramchurn S, Jennings N, McBurney P, Parsons S, Sonenberg L (2004) Argumentation-based negotiation. Knowl Eng Rev 18: 343–375

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Raiffa H (1982) The art and science of negotiation. Harvard University Press, Cambridge

    Google Scholar 

  • Raiffa H (1985) Post-settlements settlements. Negot J 1: 9–12

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Raiffa H (2002) Negotiation analysis. Harvard University Press, Cambridge

    Google Scholar 

  • Reed C, Norman T (2004) Argumentation machines—new frontiers in argument and computation. Kluwer, Boston

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Roloff M, Jordan J (1992) Achieving negotiation goals: the fruits and foibles of planning ahead. In: Putnam L, Roloff M (eds) Communication and negotiation. Sage, London, pp 21–45

    Google Scholar 

  • Rosenschein J, Zlotkin G (1994) Rules of encounter: designing conventions for automated negotiation among omputers. MIT Press, Cambridge

    Google Scholar 

  • Ross B, Kilbane M (1997) Effects of principle explanation and superficial similarity on analogical mapping in problem solving. J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn 23: 427–440

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sandholm T (1999) Distributed rational decision making. In: Weiss G (eds) MultiAgent systems—a modern approach to distributed artificial intelligence. MIT Press, Cambridge, pp 201–259

    Google Scholar 

  • Sandholm T, Lesser V (2001) Leveled-commitment contracts and strategic breach. Games Econ Behav 35: 212–270

    Article  MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  • Sandholm T, Lesser V (2002) Leveled-commitment contracting: a backtracking instrument for multi-agent systems. AI Mag 23: 89–100

    Google Scholar 

  • Sabater J, Sierra C, Parsons S, Jennings N (2002) Engineering executable agents using multi-context systems. J Log Comput 12: 413–442

    Article  MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  • Sathi A, Fox M (1989) Constraint-directed negotiation of resource reallocations. In: Gasser L, Huhns M (eds) Distributed artificial intelligence II. Morgan Kaufmann Publishers, San Mateo, pp 163–193

    Google Scholar 

  • Savage G, Blair J, Sorenson R (1989) Consider both relationships and substance when negotiating strategically. Acad Manag Exec 3: 37–48

    Google Scholar 

  • Sen S, Weiss G (1999) Learning in multiagent systems. In: Weiss G (eds) MultiAgent systems—a modern approach to distributed artificial intelligence. MIT Press, Cambridge, pp 259–298

    Google Scholar 

  • Sierra C, Jennings N, Noriega P, Parsons S (1998) A framework for argumentation-based negotiation. In: Intelligent agents IV—international Workshop on agent Theories, architectures and languages. Springer, Heidelberg, pp 177–192 (LNAI 1365)

  • Shintani T, Ito T, Sycara K (2000) Multiple negotiations among agents for a distributed meeting scheduler. In: 4th International Conference on MultiAgent Systems. IEEE Computer Society Press, pp 435–436

  • Simon H (1981) The sciences of the artificial. MIT Press, Cambridge

    Google Scholar 

  • Smith R (1980) The contract net protocol: high-level communication and control in a distributed problem solver. IEEE Trans Comput 29: 1104–1113

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Snyder G, Diesing P (1977) Conflict among nations. Princeton University Press, Princeton

    Google Scholar 

  • Sycara K (1987) Resolving adversarial conflicts: an approach integrating case-based and analytic methods. Dissertation, School of Information and Computer Science, Georgia

  • Sycara K (1990) Persuasive argumentation in negotiation. Theory Decis 28: 203–242

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sycara K (1991) Problem restructuring in negotiation. Manag Sci 37: 1248–1268

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Sycara K (1993) Machine learning for intelligent support of conflict resolution. Decis Support Syst 10: 121–136

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sycara K (1998) Multi-agent systems. AI Mag 19: 79–92

    Google Scholar 

  • Thompson L (1991) Information exchange in negotiation. J Exp Soc Psychol 27: 161–179

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Thompson L (2005) The mind and heart of the negotiator. Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs

    Google Scholar 

  • Thompson L, DeHarpport T (1994) Social judgment, feedback, and interpersonal learning in negotiation. Org Behav Hum Decis Process 58: 327–345

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Thompson L, Gentner D, Loewenstein J (2000) Avoiding missed opportunities in managerial life: analogical training more powerful than individual case training. Org Behav Hum Decis Process 82: 60–75

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Toulmin S, Rieke R, Janik A (1979) An introduction to reasoning. MacMillan, London

    Google Scholar 

  • Tutzauer F (1992) The communication of offers in dyadic bargaining. In: Putnam L, Roloff M (eds) Communication and negotiation. Sage, London, pp 67–82

    Google Scholar 

  • Vande Vliert E (1997) Complex interpersonal conflict behavior: theoretical frontiers. Psychology Press, East Sussex

    Google Scholar 

  • Von Martial F (1992) Coordinating plans of autonomous agents. Springer, Heidelberg

    Google Scholar 

  • Wagner T, Shapiro J, Xuan P, Lesser V (1999) Multi-level conflict in multi-agent systems. In: AAAI-99 Workshop on Negotiation in Multi-agent Systems. AAAI Press, pp 50–55

  • Walton D, Krabbe C (1995) Commitment in dialogue: basic concepts of interpersonal reasoning. State University of New York Press, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Weingart L, Thompson L, Bazerman M, Carroll J (1990) Tactical behaviors and negotiation outcomes. Int J Confl Manag 1: 7–31

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Weingart L, Bennett R, Brett J (1993) The impact of consideration of issues and motivational orientation on group negotiation process and outcome. J Appl Psychol 78: 504–517

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Weiss G (1999) MultiAgent systems—a modern approach to distributed artificial intelligence. MIT Press, Cambridge

    Google Scholar 

  • Wooldridge M (2002) An introduction to multiAgent systems. Wiley, Chichester

    Google Scholar 

  • Wurman P, Wellman M, Walsh W (2001) A parametrization of the auction design space. Games Econ Behav 35: 304–338

    Article  MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  • Yokoo M, Hirayama H (1998) Distributed constraint satisfaction algorithm for complex local problems. In: 3rd International Conference on Multi-Agent Systems. IEEE Computer Society Press, pp 372–379

  • Zadeh I (1971) Similarity relations and fuzzy orderings. Inf Sci 3: 177–200

    Article  MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  • Zartman I, Berman M (1982) The practical negotiator. Yale University Press, New Haven

    Google Scholar 

  • Zeng D, Sycara K (1998) Bayesian learning in negotiation. Int J Hum Comput Stud 48: 125–141

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zhang X, Lesser V, Abdallah S (2005) Efficient management of multi-linked negotiation based on a formalized model. Auton Agent Multi Agent Syst 10: 165–205

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zubek J, Pruitt D, Peirce R, McGillicuddy N, Syna H (1992) Disputant and mediator behaviors affecting short-term success in mediation. J Confl Resolut 36: 546–572

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Modelling and Simulation, LNEG-National Research Institute, Estrada do Paço do Lumiar 22, 1649-038, Lisbon, Portugal

    Fernando Lopes & A. Q. Novais

  2. Department of Computer Science, University of Liverpool, Liverpool, L69 3BX, UK

    Michael Wooldridge

Authors
  1. Fernando Lopes
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Michael Wooldridge
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. A. Q. Novais
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Fernando Lopes.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Lopes, F., Wooldridge, M. & Novais, A.Q. Negotiation among autonomous computational agents: principles, analysis and challenges. Artif Intell Rev 29, 1–44 (2008). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10462-009-9107-8

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10462-009-9107-8

Keywords

Search

Navigation