Negotiation as Mutual Belief Revision
نویسندگان
چکیده
This paper presents an axiomatic approach to negotiation protocol analysis. We consider a negotiation procedure as multiple stages of mutual belief revision. A set of postulates in AGM-style of belief revision are proposed to specify rational behavior of negotiation. An explicit construction of negotiation function is given in which negotiation process is viewed as the interaction of two iterated revision operations. As a result the proposed axiomatic system is proved to be consistent. Finally, we examine our approach with an instantiation of Rosenschein and Zlotkin’s Monotonic Concession Protocol of Negotiation.
منابع مشابه
Axiomatic Analysis of Negotiation Protocols
Negotiation protocols are rules under which a negotiation proceeds. This paper introduces a logic approach to negotiation protocol analysis. We consider a negotiation procedure as multiple stages of mutual belief revision. A set of postulates in AGM-style of belief revision are proposed to specify rational behavior of negotiation. An explicit construction of negotiation function is given in whi...
متن کاملAssessing communication strategies in argumentation-based negotiation agents equipped with belief revision
The importance of negotiation has increased in the last years as a relevant interaction to solve conflicts in multiagent systems. Although there are many different scenarios, a typical negotiating situation involves two cooperative agents that cannot reach their goals by themselves because they do not have some resources needed to reach such goals. Therefore, a way to improve their mutual benef...
متن کاملThe Effect of Multi-step Oral-revision Processes on Iranian EFL Learners’ Argumentative Writing Achievement
The purpose of this study was to explore the role of two multi-step oral-revision processes as feedback providing tools on Iranian EFL learners’ argumentative writing achievement. The participants taking part in this study were 45 Iranian EFL students who were randomly assigned into three groups. The participants of the groups were given three argumentative writing assignments, each assignment ...
متن کاملLogical Foundations of Negotiation: Strategies and Preferences
This paper is a contribution towards the body of literature which views negotiation in a qualitative light. It builds on an existing logical framework for negotiation between rational, cooperative, truthful agents proposed in (Meyer, Kwok, & Zhang 2003). We show that agents equipped with negotiation strategies corresponding to basic AGM belief revision operations are capable of reaching exactly...
متن کاملA negotiation-style framework for non-prioritised revision
We present a framework for non-prioritised belief revision i.e., belief revision in which newly acquired information is not always fully accepted in which the result of revision is arrived at via a kind of negotiation between old information and new. We show how both ordinary par t ia l meet revision and Fermd and Hansson's selective revision can be captured in this framework, and also how it s...
متن کامل