Practical Strategic Reasoning and Adaptation in Rational Argument-Based Negotiation
نویسندگان
چکیده
Recent years have seen an increasing interest of multiagent system research in employing the theory of argumentation for the development of communication protocols. While significant progress has been made in formalising argument-based communication, (possibly adaptive) agent-level argumentation strategies as a practical integration of rational agent reasoning and inter-agent argumentation dialogues have received fairly little attention. In this paper we propose the use of the InFFrA framework in argument-based negotiation. This framework allows for a strategic and adaptive communication to achieve private goals within the limits of bounded rationality in open argumentation communities. The feasibility of the approach is illustrated in an agent-based web linkage scenario, showing that its performance is comparable to that of simple proposal-based negotiation while accommodating much stricter constraints regarding “what can be said” like those used in argumentation.
منابع مشابه
Adaptive Strategies for Practical Argument-Based Negotiation
Recent years have seen an increasing interest of multiagent system research in employing the theory of argumentation for the development of communication protocols. While significant progress has been made in formalising argument-based communication, (possibly adaptive) agent-level argumentation strategies as a practical integration of rational agent reasoning and inter-agent dialogue have rece...
متن کاملImproving Agent Performance for Multi-Resource Negotiation Using Learning Automata and Case-Based Reasoning
In electronic commerce markets, agents often should acquire multiple resources to fulfil a high-level task. In order to attain such resources they need to compete with each other. In multi-agent environments, in which competition is involved, negotiation would be an interaction between agents in order to reach an agreement on resource allocation and to be coordinated with each other. In recent ...
متن کاملStrategic and Tactic Reasoning for Communicating Agents
The purpose of this paper is to address the strategic and tactic issues in agent communication. Strategic reasoning enables agents to decide about the global communication plan in terms of the macroactions to perform in order to achieve the main conversational goal. Tactic reasoning, on the other hand, allows agents to locally select, at each moment, the most appropriate argument according to t...
متن کاملKIERKEGAARD AND THE ASH‘ARITES ON REASON AND THEOLOGY
Neither the Ash‘arites nor Kierkegaard’s systems of theology are anti-rational, for Kierkegaard regards the contradiction present in the object of faith as absolute rather than logical, suggesting thereby the existential dialectics for understanding this contradiction instead of resolving it. The Ash‘arites also hold that one can understand the existence of God through absolute reason, or reaso...
متن کاملSpecification and Complexity of Strategic-Based Reasoning Using Argumentation
In this paper, we propose a new strategic and tactic reasoning for agent communication. This reasoning framework is specified using argumentation theory combined to a relevance theory. Strategic reasoning enables agents to decide about the global communication plan in terms of the macro-actions to perform in order to achieve the main conversational goal. Tactic reasoning, on the other hand, all...
متن کامل