Open AccessBook Chapter10.1007/BFB0026758

A Framework for Argumentation-Based Negotiation

- 24 Jul 1997

- pp 177-192

374

TL;DR: A general framework for negotiation in which agents exchange proposals backed by arguments which summarise the reasons why the proposals should be accepted is described.

Abstract: Many autonomous agents operate in domains in which the cooperation of their fellow agents cannot be guaranteed. In such domains negotiation is essential to persuade others of the value of co-operation. This paper describes a general framework for negotiation in which agents exchange proposals backed by arguments which summarise the reasons why the proposals should be accepted. The argumentation is persuasive because the exchanges are able to alter the mental state of the agents involved. The framework is inspired by our work in the domain of business process management and is explained using examples from that domain.

AI Agents for this Paper

Find similar papers on Google Scholar, PubMed and Arxiv
Write a critical review of this paper
Analyze citations of this paper to find unaddressed research gaps

Most frequently asked questions

1. What contributions have the authors mentioned in the paper "A framework for argumentation-based negotiation" ?

This paper describes a general framework for negotiation in which agents exchange proposals backed by arguments which summarise the reasons why the proposals should be accepted.

2. What future works have the authors mentioned in the paper "A framework for argumentation-based negotiation" ?

Further work is required to tie these preferences to notions of rationality, in particular to standard ideas of expected utility.. This may be inadequate for some domains, in which case it will be necessary for agents to be able to discuss what rules of inference are appropriate.

Fig. 1. Agent system for BT’s “Provide Customer Quote” business process. The direction of the arrow indicates who provides the service labelling the arrow to whom.

Fig. 4. Formalisation of the arguments presented in Figure 2.

Fig. 3. Negotiation protocol. In accept x y and reject x y illocutions always refer to the last proposal. Proposal x y stands for any illocution constructed with any of the following particles: offer, threaten, reward, appeal, and between agentsx and y. We omit the time stamp in the illocutions.

Fig. 2. Sample arguments in the BT application.

Citations

Journal Article•10.1023/A:1008746126376

Automated Negotiation: Prospects, Methods and Challenges

Nicholas R. Jennings, +5 more

- 01 Mar 2001

- Group Decision and Negotiation

1.5K

•Journal Article•10.1145/355598.362773

Transition network grammars for natural language analysis

William A. Woods

- 01 Oct 1970

- Communications of The ACM

TL;DR: The use of augmented transition network grammars for the analysis of natural language sentences is described, and structure-building actions associated with the arcs of the grammar network allow for a powerful selectivity which can rule out meaningless analyses and take advantage of semantic information to guide the parsing.

...read moreread less

1.4K

•Journal Article•10.1093/LOGCOM/8.3.261

Agents that Reason and Negotiate by Arguing

Simon Parsons, +2 more

- 01 Jun 1998

- Journal of Logic and Computation

TL;DR: A framework, based upon a system of argumentation, which permits agents to negotiate in order to establish acceptable ways of solving problems and describes a case study of this relationship for a particular class of architectures (namely those for belief-desire-intention agents).

...read moreread less

775

•Journal Article•10.1017/S0269888904000098

Argumentation-based negotiation

Iyad Rahwan, +5 more

- 01 Dec 2003

- Knowledge Engineering Review

TL;DR: This article provides a conceptual framework through which the core elements and features required by agents engaged in argumentation-based negotiation, as well as the environment that hosts these agents are outlined, and surveys and evaluates existing proposed techniques in the literature.

...read moreread less

689

Journal Article•10.1023/A:1022232410606

A Classification Scheme for Negotiation in Electronic Commerce

Alessio Lomuscio, +2 more

- 01 Jan 2001

- Group Decision and Negotiation

TL;DR: This paper identifies the main parameters on which any automated negotiation depends and uses a classification framework to categorise a representative sample of some of the most prominent negotiation models that exist in the literature.

...read moreread less

562

...

Expand

References

•Journal Article•10.1016/0004-3702(94)00041-X

On the acceptability of arguments and its fundamental role in nonmonotonic reasoning, logic programming and n -person games

Phan Minh Dung

- 01 Sep 1995

- Artificial Intelligence

TL;DR: By showing that argumentation can be viewed as a special form of logic programming with negation as failure, this paper introduces a general logic-programming-based method for generating meta-interpreters for argumentation systems, a method very much similar to the compiler-compiler idea in conventional programming.

...read moreread less

4.8K

BDI Agents: From Theory to Practice

Anand S. Rao, +1 more

- 01 Jan 1995

TL;DR: This paper explores a particular type of rational agent, a BeliefDesire-Intention (BDI) agent, and integrates the theoretical foundations of BDI agents from both a quantitative decision-theoretic perspective and a symbolic reasoning perspective.

...read moreread less

3.1K

•Proceedings Article

The role of common ontology in achieving sharable, reusable knowledge bases

Thomas R. Gruber

- 22 Apr 1991

TL;DR: A solar cell has a heat collector bar with a heat absorbing material in contact there with a transparent web member having a plurality of capsule uniformly distributed therein with each capsules having a suspension of highly reflective, flake-like, field responsive particles therein.

...read moreread less

425

•Journal Article•10.1109/TSMC.1981.4308579

Frameworks for Cooperation in Distributed Problem Solving

Smith, +1 more

- 01 Jan 1981

- IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man, and C...

354

Journal Article•10.1007/BF00162699

Persuasive argumentation in negotiation

Katia Sycara

- 01 May 1990

- Theory and Decision

TL;DR: This paper presents a model of persuasive argumentation that integrates Artificial Intelligence and decision theoretic methods, and has been implemented as part of the PERSUADER, a multi-agent computer program that operates in the domain of labor negotiations.

...read moreread less

279

...

Expand

A Framework for Argumentation-Based Negotiation

Chat with Paper

AI Agents for this Paper

Most frequently asked questions

1. What contributions have the authors mentioned in the paper "A framework for argumentation-based negotiation" ?

2. What future works have the authors mentioned in the paper "A framework for argumentation-based negotiation" ?

Figures

Citations

Automated Negotiation: Prospects, Methods and Challenges

Transition network grammars for natural language analysis

Agents that Reason and Negotiate by Arguing

Argumentation-based negotiation

A Classification Scheme for Negotiation in Electronic Commerce

References

On the acceptability of arguments and its fundamental role in nonmonotonic reasoning, logic programming and n -person games

BDI Agents: From Theory to Practice

The role of common ontology in achieving sharable, reusable knowledge bases

Frameworks for Cooperation in Distributed Problem Solving

Persuasive argumentation in negotiation

Related Papers (5)

Agents that Reason and Negotiate by Arguing

Argumentation-based negotiation

Reaching agreements through argumentation: a logical model and implementation

On the acceptability of arguments and its fundamental role in nonmonotonic reasoning, logic programming and n -person games

Automated Negotiation: Prospects, Methods and Challenges