A multi-agent system with application in project scheduling

The new economic and social dynamics increase project complexity and makes scheduling problems more difficult, therefore scheduling requires more versatile solutions as Multi Agent Systems (MAS). In this paper the authors analyze the implementation of a Multi-Agent System (MAS) considering two scheduling problems: TCPSP (Time-Constrained Project Scheduling), and RCPSP (Resource-Constrained Project Scheduling). The authors propose an improved BDI (Beliefs, Desires, and Intentions) model and present the first the MAS implementation results in JADE platform.multi-agent architecture, scheduling, project management, BDI architecture, JADE.

Engineering automated negotiations

To make automated negotiation widely used in real scenarios, it is necessary to develop advanced software systems that are able to carry out such negotiation in those scenarios. However, although much work has been done in automated negotiation, most of these efforts have been focused on the development of negotiation protocols and strategies and only a few are centred on software frameworks for automated negotiation. We are concerned with the engineering aspect of automated negotiation. Specifically, we detail a software framework to develop automated negotiations of service level agreements. Unlike other proposals, we provide a detailed description of elements for full decision-making support including evaluating offers, strategy selection, building a market and opponents model, and creating counterproposals

Acceptance conditions in automated negotiation

In every negotiation with a deadline, one of the negotiating parties has to accept an offer to avoid a break off. A break off is usually an undesirable outcome for both parties, therefore it is important that a negotiator employs a proficient mechanism to decide under which conditions to accept. When designing such conditions one is faced with the acceptance dilemma: accepting the current offer may be suboptimal, as better offers may still be presented. On the other hand, accepting too late may prevent an agreement from being reached, resulting in a break off with no gain for either party. Motivated by the challenges of bilateral negotiations between automated agents and by the results and insights of the automated negotiating agents competition (ANAC), we classify and compare state-of-the-art generic acceptance conditions. We focus on decoupled acceptance conditions, i.e. conditions that do not depend on the bidding strategy that is used. We performed extensive experiments to compare the performance of acceptance conditions in combination with a broad range of bidding strategies and negotiation domains. Furthermore we propose new acceptance conditions and we demonstrate that they outperform the other conditions that we study. In particular, it is shown that they outperform the standard acceptance condition of comparing the current offer with the offer the agent is ready to send out. We also provide insight in to why some conditions work better than others and investigate correlations between the properties of the negotiation environment and the efficacy of acceptance condition

Using Similarity Criteria to Make Negotiation Trade-Offs

This paper addresses the issues involved in software agents making trade-offs during automated negotiations in which they have information uncertainty and resource limitations. In particular, the importance of being able to make trade-offs in real-world applications is highlighted and a novel algorithm for performing trade-offs for multi-dimensional goods is developed. The algorithm uses the notion of fuzzy similarity in order to find negotiation solutions that are beneficial to both parties. Empirical results indicate the benefits and effectiveness of the trade-off algorithm in a range of negotiation situations

The significance of bidding, accepting and opponent modeling in automated negotiation

Given the growing interest in automated negotiation, the search for effective strategies has produced a variety of different negotiation agents. Despite their diversity, there is a common structure to their design. A negotiation agent comprises three key components: the bidding strategy, the opponent model and the acceptance criteria. We show that this three-component view of a negotiating architecture not only provides a useful basis for developing such agents but also provides a useful analytical tool. By combining these components in varying ways, we are able to demonstrate the contribution of each component to the overall negotiation result, and thus determine the key contributing components. Moreover, we are able to study the interaction between components and present detailed interaction effects. Furthermore, we find that the bidding strategy in particular is of critical importance to the negotiator's success and far exceeds the importance of opponent preference modeling techniques. Our results contribute to the shaping of a research agenda for negotiating agent design by providing guidelines on how agent developers can spend their time most effectively

Defeasible Logic for Automated Negotiation

Negotiation plays a fundamental role in e-commerce. In this paper, the application of defeasible logic for automated negotiation is investigated. Defeasible logic is flexible enough to be adapted to several possible negotiation strategies, has efficient implementations, and provides a formal basis for analysis (e.g. to explain why a negotiation was not successful). Two case studies, one small and one more comprehensive, will be described and the feasibility of approaches based on defeasible logic will be discussed

Is Defeasible Logic Applicable?

In this paper the application of defeasible logic for automated negotiation is investigated. Defeasible logic is flexible enough to be adapted to several possible negotiation strategies, has efficient implementations, and provides a formal basis for analysis (e.g. to explain why a negotiation was not successful). Two case studies, one small and one more comprehensive, will be described and the feasibility of approaches based on defeasible logic will be discussed

Investigating adaptive, confidence-based strategic negotiations in complex multiagent environments

We propose an adaptive 1-to-many negotiation strategy for multiagent coalition formation in complex environments that are dynamic, uncertain, and real-time. Our strategy deals with how to assign multiple issues to a set of concurrent negotiations based on an initiating agent’s confidence in its profiling of its peer agents. When an agent is confident, it uses a packaged approach—conducting multiple multi-issue negotiations—with its peers. Otherwise, it uses a pipelined approach—conducting multiple single-issue negotiations—with its peers. The initiating agent is also capable of using both approaches in a hybrid, dealing with a mixed group of responding peers. An agent’s confidence in its profile or view of another agent is crucial, and that depends on the environment in which the agents operate. To evaluate the proposed strategy, we use a coalition formation framework in a complex environment. Results show that the proposed strategy outperforms the purely pipelined strategy and the purely packaged strategy in both efficiency and effectiveness

Investigating adaptive, confidence-based strategic negotiations in complex multiagent environments

We propose an adaptive 1-to-many negotiation strategy for multiagent coalition formation in complex environments that are dynamic, uncertain, and real-time. Our strategy deals with how to assign multiple issues to a set of concurrent negotiations based on an initiating agent’s confidence in its profiling of its peer agents. When an agent is confident, it uses a packaged approach—conducting multiple multi-issue negotiations—with its peers. Otherwise, it uses a pipelined approach—conducting multiple single-issue negotiations—with its peers. The initiating agent is also capable of using both approaches in a hybrid, dealing with a mixed group of responding peers. An agent’s confidence in its profile or view of another agent is crucial, and that depends on the environment in which the agents operate. To evaluate the proposed strategy, we use a coalition formation framework in a complex environment. Results show that the proposed strategy outperforms the purely pipelined strategy and the purely packaged strategy in both efficiency and effectiveness