The first automated negotiating agents competition (ANAC 2010)

Motivated by the challenges of bilateral negotiations between people and automated agents we organized the first automated negotiating agents competition (ANAC 2010). The purpose of the competition is to facilitate the research in the area bilateral multi-issue closed negotiation. The competition was based on the Genius environment, which is a General Environment for Negotiation with Intelligent multi-purpose Usage Simulation. The first competition was held in conjunction with the Ninth International Conference on Autonomous Agents and Multiagent Systems (AAMAS-10) and was comprised of seven teams. This paper presents an overview of the competition, as well as general and contrasting approaches towards negotiation strategies that were adopted by the participants of the competition. Based on analysis in post--tournament experiments, the paper also attempts to provide some insights with regard to effective approaches towards the design of negotiation strategies

What to bid and when to stop

Negotiation is an important activity in human society, and is studied by various disciplines, ranging from economics and game theory, to electronic commerce, social psychology, and artificial intelligence. Traditionally, negotiation is a necessary, but also time-consuming and expensive activity. Therefore, in the last decades there has been a large interest in the automation of negotiation, for example in the setting of e-commerce. This interest is fueled by the promise of automated agents eventually being able to negotiate on behalf of human negotiators.Every year, automated negotiation agents are improving in various ways, and there is now a large body of negotiation strategies available, all with their unique strengths and weaknesses. For example, some agents are able to predict the opponent's preferences very well, while others focus more on having a sophisticated bidding strategy. The problem however, is that there is little incremental improvement in agent design, as the agents are tested in varying negotiation settings, using a diverse set of performance measures. This makes it very difficult to meaningfully compare the agents, let alone their underlying techniques. As a result, we lack a reliable way to pinpoint the most effective components in a negotiating agent.There are two major advantages of distinguishing between the different components of a negotiating agent's strategy: first, it allows the study of the behavior and performance of the components in isolation. For example, it becomes possible to compare the preference learning component of all agents, and to identify the best among them. Second, we can proceed to mix and match different components to create new negotiation strategies., e.g.: replacing the preference learning technique of an agent and then examining whether this makes a difference. Such a procedure enables us to combine the individual components to systematically explore the space of possible negotiation strategies.To develop a compositional approach to evaluate and combine the components, we identify structure in most agent designs by introducing the BOA architecture, in which we can develop and integrate the different components of a negotiating agent. We identify three main components of a general negotiation strategy; namely a bidding strategy (B), possibly an opponent model (O), and an acceptance strategy (A). The bidding strategy considers what concessions it deems appropriate given its own preferences, and takes the opponent into account by using an opponent model. The acceptance strategy decides whether offers proposed by the opponent should be accepted.The BOA architecture is integrated into a generic negotiation environment called Genius, which is a software environment for designing and evaluating negotiation strategies. To explore the negotiation strategy space of the negotiation research community, we amend the Genius repository with various existing agents and scenarios from literature. Additionally, we organize a yearly international negotiation competition (ANAC) to harvest even more strategies and scenarios. ANAC also acts as an evaluation tool for negotiation strategies, and encourages the design of negotiation strategies and scenarios.We re-implement agents from literature and ANAC and decouple them to fit into the BOA architecture without introducing any changes in their behavior. For each of the three components, we manage to find and analyze the best ones for specific cases, as described below. We show that the BOA framework leads to significant improvements in agent design by wining ANAC 2013, which had 19 participating teams from 8 international institutions, with an agent that is designed using the BOA framework and is informed by a preliminary analysis of the different components.In every negotiation, one of the negotiating parties must accept an offer to reach an agreement. Therefore, it is important that a negotiator employs a proficient mechanism to decide under which conditions to accept. When contemplating whether to accept an offer, the agent is faced with the acceptance dilemma: accepting the offer may be suboptimal, as better offers may still be presented before time runs out. 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. We classify and compare state-of-the-art generic acceptance conditions. We propose new acceptance strategies and we demonstrate that they outperform the other conditions. We also provide insight into why some conditions work better than others and investigate correlations between the properties of the negotiation scenario and the efficacy of acceptance conditions.Later, we adopt a more principled approach by applying optimal stopping theory to calculate the optimal decision on the acceptance of an offer. We approach the decision of whether to accept as a sequential decision problem, by modeling the bids received as a stochastic process. We determine the optimal acceptance policies for particular opponent classes and we present an approach to estimate the expected range of offers when the type of opponent is unknown. We show that the proposed approach is able to find the optimal time to accept, and improves upon all existing acceptance strategies.Another principal component of a negotiating agent's strategy is its ability to take the opponent's preferences into account. The quality of an opponent model can be measured in two different ways. One is to use the agent's performance as a benchmark for the model's quality. We evaluate and compare the performance of a selection of state-of-the-art opponent modeling techniques in negotiation. We provide an overview of the factors influencing the quality of a model and we analyze how the performance of opponent models depends on the negotiation setting. We identify a class of simple and surprisingly effective opponent modeling techniques that did not receive much previous attention in literature.The other way to measure the quality of an opponent model is to directly evaluate its accuracy by using similarity measures. We review all methods to measure the accuracy of an opponent model and we then analyze how changes in accuracy translate into performance differences. Moreover, we pinpoint the best predictors for good performance. This leads to new insights concerning how to construct an opponent model, and what we need to measure when optimizing performance.Finally, we take two different approaches to gain more insight into effective bidding strategies. We present a new classification method for negotiation strategies, based on their pattern of concession making against different kinds of opponents. We apply this technique to classify some well-known negotiating strategies, and we formulate guidelines on how agents should bid in order to be successful, which gives insight into the bidding strategy space of negotiating agents. Furthermore, we apply optimal stopping theory again, this time to find the concessions that maximize utility for the bidder against particular opponents. We show there is an interesting connection between optimal bidding and optimal acceptance strategies, in the sense that they are mirrored versions of each other.Lastly, after analyzing all components separately, we put the pieces back together again. We take all BOA components accumulated so far, including the best ones, and combine them all together to explore the space of negotiation strategies.We compute the contribution of each component to the overall negotiation result, and we study the interaction between components. We find that combining the best agent components indeed makes the strongest agents. This shows that the component-based view of the BOA architecture not only provides a useful basis for developing negotiating agents but also provides a useful analytical tool. By varying the BOA components we are able to demonstrate the contribution of each component to the negotiation result, and thus analyze the significance of each. The bidding strategy is by far the most important to consider, followed by the acceptance conditions and finally followed by the opponent model.Our results validate the analytical approach of the BOA framework to first optimize the individual components, and then to recombine them into a negotiating agent

An Evolutionary Approach for Learning Opponent's Deadline and Reserve Points in Multi-Issue Negotiation

The efficiency of automated multi-issue negotiation depends on the available information about the opponent. In a competitive negotiation environment, agents do not reveal their parameters to their opponents in order to avoid exploitation. Several researchers have argued that an agent's optimal strategy can be determined using the opponent's deadline and reserve points. In this paper, we propose a new learning agent, so-called Evolutionary Learning Agent (ELA), able to estimate its opponent's deadline and reserve points in bilateral multi-issue negotiation based on opponent's counter-offers (without any additional extra information). ELA reduces the learning problem to a system of non-linear equations and uses an evolutionary algorithm based on the elitism aspect to solve it. Experimental study shows that our learning agent outperforms others agents by improving its outcome in term of average and joint utility

Practical strategies for agent-based negotiation in complex environments

Agent-based negotiation, whereby the negotiation is automated by software programs, can be applied to many different negotiation situations, including negotiations between friends, businesses or countries. A key benefit of agent-based negotiation over human negotiation is that it can be used to negotiate effectively in complex negotiation environments, which consist of multiple negotiation issues, time constraints, and multiple unknown opponents. While automated negotiation has been an active area of research in the past twenty years, existing work has a number of limitations. Specifically, most of the existing literature has considered time constraints in terms of the number of rounds of negotiation that take place. In contrast, in this work we consider time constraints which are based on the amount of time that has elapsed. This requires a different approach, since the time spent computing the next action has an effect on the utility of the outcome, whereas the actual number of offers exchanged does not. In addition to these time constraints, in the complex negotiation environments which we consider, there are multiple negotiation issues, and we assume that the opponents’ preferences over these issues and the behaviour of those opponents are unknown. Finally, in our environment there can be concurrent negotiations between many participants.Against this background, in this thesis we present the design of a range of practical negotiation strategies, the most advanced of which uses Gaussian process regression to coordinate its concession against its various opponents, whilst considering the behaviour of those opponents and the time constraints. In more detail, the strategy uses observations of the offers made by each opponent to predict the future concession of that opponent. By considering the discounting factor, it predicts the future time which maximises the utility of the offers, and we then use this in setting our rate of concession.Furthermore, we evaluate the negotiation agents that we have developed, which use our strategies, and show that, particularly in the more challenging scenarios, our most advanced strategy outperforms other state-of-the-art agents from the Automated Negotiating Agent Competition, which provides an international benchmark for this work. In more detail, our results show that, in one-to-one negotiation, in the highly discounted scenarios, our agent reaches outcomes which, on average, are 2.3% higher than those of the next best agent. Furthermore, using empirical game theoretic analysis we show the robustness of our strategy in a variety of tournament settings. This analysis shows that, in the highly discounted scenarios, no agent can benefit by choosing a different strategy (taken from the top four strategies in that setting) than ours. Finally, in the many-to-many negotiations, we show how our strategy is particularly effective in highly competitive scenarios, where it outperforms the state-of-the-art many-to-many negotiation strategy by up to 45%

Autonomous agents in bargaining games : an evolutionary investigation of fundamentals, strategies, and business applications

Bargaining is becoming increasingly important due to developments within the field of electronic commerce, especially the development of autonomous software agents. Software agents are programs which, given instructions from a user, are capable of autonomously and intelligently realise a given task. By means of such agents, the bargaining process can be automated, allowing products and services together with related conditions, such as warranty and delivery time, to be flexible and tuned to the individual preferences of the people concerned. In this theses we concentrate on both fundamental aspects of bargaining as well as business-related applications of automated bargaining using software agents. The fundamental part investigates bargaining outcomes within a stylised world, and the factors that influence these outcomes. This can provide insights for the production of software agents, strategies, and setting up bargaining rules for practical situations. We study these aspects using computational simulations of bargaining agents. Hereby we consider adaptive systems, i.e., where agents learn to adjust their bargaining strategy given past experience. This learning behaviour is simulated using evolutionary algorithms. These algorithms originate from the field of artificial intelligence, and are inspired by the biological theory of evolution. Originally, evolutionary algorithms were designed for solving optimisation problems, but they are now increasingly being used within economics for modelling human learning behaviour. Besides computational simulations, we also consider mathematical solutions from game theory for relatively simple cases. Game theory is mainly concerned with the “rational man”, that is, with optimal outcomes within an stylised setting (or game) where people act rationally. We use the game-theoretic outcomes to validate the computational experiments. The advantage of computer simulations is that less strict assumptions are necessary, and that more complex interactions that are closer to real-world settings can be investigated. First of all, we study a bargaining setting where two players exchange offers and counter offers, the so-called alternating-offers game. This game is frequently used for modelling bargaining about for instance the price of a product or service. It is also important, however, to allow other product- and service-related aspects to be negotiated, such as quality, delivery time, and warranty. This enables compromises by conceding on less important issues and demanding a higher value for relatively important aspects. This way, bargaining is less competitive and the resulting outcome can be mutually beneficial. Therefore, we investigate using computational simulations an extended version of the alternating-offers game, where multiple aspects are negotiated concurrently. Moreover, we apply game theory to validate the results of the computational experiments. The simulation shows that learning agents are capable of quickly finding optimal compromises, also called Pareto-efficient outcomes. In addition, we study the effects of time pressure that arise if negotiations are broken off with a small probability, for example due to external eventualities. In absence of time pressure and a maximum number of negotiation rounds, outcomes are very unbalanced: the player that has the opportunity to make a final offer proposes a take-it-or-leave-it offer in the last round, which leaves the other player with a deal that is only slightly better than no deal at all. With relatively high time pressure, on the other hand, the first offer is most important and almost all agreements are reached in the first round. Another interesting result is that the simulation outcomes after a long period of learning in general coincide with the results from game theory, in spite of the fact that the learning agents are not “rational”. In reality, not only the final outcome is important, but also other factors play a role, such as the fairness of an offer. Using the simulation we study the influence of such fairness norms on the bargaining outcomes. The fairness norms result in much more balanced outcomes, even with no time pressure, and seem to be closer outcomes in the real world. Negotiations are rarely isolated, but can also be influenced by external factors such as additional bargaining opportunities. We therefore also consider bargaining within a market-like setting, where both buyers and sellers can bargain with several opponents before reaching an agreement. The negotiations are executed consecutively until an agreement is reached or no more opportunities are available. Each bargaining game is reduced to a single round, where player 1 makes an offer and player 2 can only respond by rejecting or accepting this offer. Using an evolutionary simulation we study several properties of this market game. It appears that the outcomes depend on the information that is available to the players. If players are informed about the bargaining opportunities of their opponents, the first player in turn has the advantage and always proposes a take-it-or-leave-it deal that leaves the other player with a relatively poor outcome. This outcome is consistent with a game-theoretic analysis which we also present in this thesis. If this information is not available, a theoretical analysis is very hard. The evolutionary simulation, however, shows that in this case the responder obtains a better deal. This occurs because the first player can no longer anticipate the response of the other player, and therefore bids lower to avoid a disagreement. In this thesis, we additionally consider other factors that influence the outcomes of the market game, such as negotiation over multiple issues simultaneously, search costs, and break off probabilities. Besides fundamental issues, this thesis presents a number of business-related applications of automated bargaining, as well as generic bargaining strategies for agents that can be employed in related areas. As a first application, we introduce a framework where negotiation is used for recommending shops to customers, for example on a web page of an electronic shopping mall. Through a market-driven auction a relevant selection of shops is determined in a distributed fashion. This is achieved by selling a limited number of banner spaces in an electronic auction. For each arriving customer on the web page, shops can automatically place bids for this “customer attention space” through their shop agents. These software agents bid based on a customer profile, containing personal data of the customer, such as age, interests, and/or keywords in a search query. The shop agents are adaptive and learn, given feedback from the customers, which profiles to target and how much to bid in the auction. The highest bidders are then selected and displayed to the customer. The feasibility of this distributed approach for matching shops to customers is demonstrated using an evolutionary simulation. Several customer models and auction mechanisms are studied, and we show that the market-based approach results in a proper selection of shops for the customers. Bargaining can be especially beneficial if not only the price, but other aspects are considered as well. This allows for example to customise products and services to the personal preferences of a user. We developed a system makes use of these properties for selling and personalising so-called information goods, such as news articles, software, and music. Using the alternating-offers protocol, a seller agent negotiates with several buyers simultaneously about a fixed price, a per-item price, and the quality of a bundle of information goods. The system is capable of taking into account important business-related conditions such as the fairness of the negotiation. The agents combine a search strategy and a concession strategy to generate offers in the negotiations. The concession strategy determines the amount the agent will concede each round, whereas the search strategy takes care of the personalisation of the offer. We introduce two search strategies in this thesis, and show through computer experiments that the use of these strategies by a buyer and seller agent, result in personalised outcomes, also when combined with various concession strategies. The search strategies presented here can be easily applied to other domains where personalisation is important. In addition, we also developed concession strategies for the seller agent that can be used in settings where a single seller agent bargains with several buyer agents simultaneously. Even if bargaining itself is bilateral (i.e., between two parties), a seller agent can actually benefit from the fact that several such negotiations occur concurrently. The developed strategies are focussed on domains where supply is flexible and can be adjusted to meet demand, like for information goods. We study fixed strategies, time-dependent strategies and introduce several auction-inspired strategies. Auctions are often used when one party negotiates with several opponents simultaneously. Although the latter strategies benefit from the advantages of auctions, the actual negotiation remains bilateral and consists of exchanging offers and counter offers. We developed an evolutionary simulation environment to evaluate the seller agent’s strategies. We especially consider the case where buyers are time-impatient and under pressure to reach agreements early. The simulations show that the auction-inspired strategies are able to obtain almost maximum profits from the negotiations, given sufficient time pressure of the buyers

Computational intelligence based complex adaptive system-of-systems architecture evolution strategy

The dynamic planning for a system-of-systems (SoS) is a challenging endeavor. Large scale organizations and operations constantly face challenges to incorporate new systems and upgrade existing systems over a period of time under threats, constrained budget and uncertainty. It is therefore necessary for the program managers to be able to look at the future scenarios and critically assess the impact of technology and stakeholder changes. Managers and engineers are always looking for options that signify affordable acquisition selections and lessen the cycle time for early acquisition and new technology addition. This research helps in analyzing sequential decisions in an evolving SoS architecture based on the wave model through three key features namely; meta-architecture generation, architecture assessment and architecture implementation. Meta-architectures are generated using evolutionary algorithms and assessed using type II fuzzy nets. The approach can accommodate diverse stakeholder views and convert them to key performance parameters (KPP) and use them for architecture assessment. On the other hand, it is not possible to implement such architecture without persuading the systems to participate into the meta-architecture. To address this issue a negotiation model is proposed which helps the SoS manger to adapt his strategy based on system owners behavior. This work helps in capturing the varied differences in the resources required by systems to prepare for participation. The viewpoints of multiple stakeholders are aggregated to assess the overall mission effectiveness of the overarching objective. An SAR SoS example problem illustrates application of the method. Also a dynamic programing approach can be used for generating meta-architectures based on the wave model. --Abstract, page iii

Distributed decision-making in electric power system transmission maintenance scheduling using Multi-Agent Systems (MAS)

In this work, motivated by the need to coordinate transmission maintenance scheduling among a multiplicity of self-interested entities in restructured power industry, a distributed decision support framework based on multiagent negotiation systems (MANS) is developed. An innovative risk-based transmission maintenance optimization procedure is introduced. Several models for linking condition monitoring information to the equipment\u27s instantaneous failure probability are presented, which enable quantitative evaluation of the effectiveness of maintenance activities in terms of system cumulative risk reduction. Methodologies of statistical processing, equipment deterioration evaluation and time-dependent failure probability calculation are also described. A novel framework capable of facilitating distributed decision-making through multiagent negotiation is developed. A multiagent negotiation model is developed and illustrated that accounts for uncertainty and enables social rationality. Some issues of multiagent negotiation convergence and scalability are discussed. The relationships between agent-based negotiation and auction systems are also identified. A four-step MAS design methodology for constructing multiagent systems for power system applications is presented. A generic multiagent negotiation system, capable of inter-agent communication and distributed decision support through inter-agent negotiations, is implemented. A multiagent system framework for facilitating the automated integration of condition monitoring information and maintenance scheduling for power transformers is developed. Simulations of multiagent negotiation-based maintenance scheduling among several independent utilities are provided. It is shown to be a viable alternative solution paradigm to the traditional centralized optimization approach in today\u27s deregulated environment. This multiagent system framework not only facilitates the decision-making among competing power system entities, but also provides a tool to use in studying competitive industry relative to monopolistic industry

Automated Service Negotiation Between Autonomous Computational Agents

PhDMulti-agent systems are a new computational approach for solving real world, dynamic and open system problems. Problems are conceptualized as a collection of decentralised autonomous agents that collaborate to reach the overall solution. Because of the agents autonomy, their limited rationality, and the distributed nature of most real world problems, the key issue in multi-agent system research is how to model interactions between agents. Negotiation models have emerged as suitable candidates to solve this interaction problem due to their decentralised nature, emphasis on mutual selection of an action, and the prevalence of negotiation in real social systems. The central problem addressed in this thesis is the design and engineering of a negotiation model for autonomous agents for sharing tasks and/or resources. To solve this problem a negotiation protocol and a set of deliberation mechanisms are presented which together coordinate the actions of a multiple agent system. In more detail, the negotiation protocol constrains the action selection problem solving of the agents through the use of normative rules of interaction. These rules temporally order, according to the agents' roles, communication utterances by specifying both who can say what, as well as when. Specifically, the presented protocol is a repeated, sequential model where offers are iteratively exchanged. Under this protocol, agents are assumed to be fully committed to their utterances and utterances are private between the two agents. The protocol is distributed, symmetric, supports bi and/or multi-agent negotiation as well as distributive and integrative negotiation. In addition to coordinating the agent interactions through normative rules, a set of mechanisms are presented that coordinate the deliberation process of the agents during the ongoing negotiation. Whereas the protocol normatively describes the orderings of actions, the mechanisms describe the possible set of agent strategies in using the protocol. These strategies are captured by a negotiation architecture that is composed of responsive and deliberative decision mechanisms. Decision making with the former mechanism is based on a linear combination of simple functions called tactics, which manipulate the utility of deals. The latter mechanisms are subdivided into trade-off and issue manipulation mechanisms. The trade-off mechanism generates offers that manipulate the value, rather than the overall utility, of the offer. The issue manipulation mechanism aims to increase the likelihood of an agreement by adding and removing issues into the negotiation set. When taken together, these mechanisms represent a continuum of possible decision making capabilities: ranging from behaviours that exhibit greater awareness of environmental resources and less to solution quality, to behaviours that attempt to acquire a given solution quality independently of the resource consumption. The protocol and mechanisms are empirically evaluated and have been applied to real world task distribution problems in the domains of business process management and telecommunication management. The main contribution and novelty of this research are: i) a domain independent computational model of negotiation that agents can use to support a wide variety of decision making strategies, ii) an empirical evaluation of the negotiation model for a given agent architecture in a number of different negotiation environments, and iii) the application of the developed model to a number of target domains. An increased strategy set is needed because the developed protocol is less restrictive and less constrained than the traditional ones, thus supporting development of strategic interaction models that belong more to open systems. Furthermore, because of the combination of the large number of environmental possibilities and the size of the set of possible strategies, the model has been empirically investigated to evaluate the success of strategies in different environments. These experiments have facilitated the development of general guidelines that can be used by designers interested in developing strategic negotiating agents. The developed model is grounded from the requirement considerations from both the business process management and telecommunication application domains. It has also been successfully applied to five other real world scenarios