Argumentation and Artifacts for Negotiation Support
نویسندگان
چکیده
Negotiation is a central process in an agent society where autonomous agents have to cooperate in order to resolve conflicting interests and yet compete to divide limited resources. A direct dialogical exchange of information between agents usually leads to competitive forms of negotiation where the most powerful agents win. Alternatively, an intelligent mediated interaction may better achieve the goal of reaching a common agreement and supporting cooperative negotiation. In both cases argumentation is the reference framework to rationally manage conflicting knowledge or objectives, a framework which provides the fundamental abstraction “argument” to exchange pieces of information. In this paper we present a novel conceptual framework for negotiation dialogues using argumentation between autonomous software agents which enables their dialogues to be automated. The framework, called SANA (Supporting Artifacts for Negotiation with Argumentation), incorporates intelligent components able to assist the agent participants to reach agreement by inferring mutually-acceptable proposals. The framework also permits agents to engage in negotiation dialogues with each other, generating and exchanging proposed deals and arguments for and against these proposals. Acceptability of proposals is then assessed in terms of an agreed argumentation framework semantics. We present the architecture of our framework, along with the syntax, and outline denotational semantics of an associated agent interaction protocol, called SANAP.
منابع مشابه
Chapter 8 Argumentation and Artifacts for Negotiation Support
Negotiation is a central process in an agent society where autonomous agents have to cooperate in order to resolve conflicting interests and yet compete to divide limited resources. A direct dialogical exchange of information between agents usually leads to competitive forms of negotiation where the most powerful agents win. Alternatively, an intelligent mediated interaction may better achieve ...
متن کاملAn action-resource language for argumentation: the case of softwood lumber negotiation
We view a group problem as a resource allocation problem among involved parties, ana’ negotiation as the members’ act to protect, or better yet, to gain additional resources for themselves. Group members gather together to achieve a common goal. Yet, they are also stakeholders seeking to defend their own interest as well. As such, negotiation can be seen as an effort of all parties seeking to e...
متن کاملExtending Contract Net Protocol for Arguing Agents
Negotiation is a technique through which two agents having conflicting interests reach an agreement that is beneficial for both of them. Argumentation-based negotiation is a better form of negotiation where one negotiating agent argues with another to justify its position and influences the other agent to follow it. This increases the likelihood and quality of agreement in a negotiation process...
متن کاملRisk, negotiation and argumentation—a decision support system based approach
There has been very little published research on building legal decision support systems to perform risk assessment. Yet one of the principal goals of the law is to reduce risk through the avoidance of litigation. This paper discusses ongoing research on how legal decision support systems can support risk reduction and negotiation. Toulmin’s theory of argumentation is proposed as one technique ...
متن کاملArguments and Artifacts for Dispute Resolution
In a social context cultural differences, individual interests, and partial awareness are often the causes of disputes. Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) is usually considered to be alternative to litigation, and can also be used to allow disputing parts to find an agreement. A dispute resolution is not an easy task and usually involves more entities including mediator or arbitrator with mul...
متن کامل