Skip to main content
Fachgebiete
Automobil + Motoren Bauwesen + Immobilien Business IT + Informatik Elektrotechnik + Elektronik Energie + Nachhaltigkeit Finance + Banking Management + Führung Marketing + Vertrieb Maschinenbau + Werkstoffe Versicherung + Risiko
DE
EN
Bücher
Zeitschriften
Themenseiten
Organisationspsychologie Projektmanagement Marketing Smart Manufacturing
Weitere Formate
Podcasts Webinare Technik Webinare Wirtschaft Kongresse Veranstaltungskalender Awards
Jetzt Einzelzugang starten
Zugang für Unternehmen
Referenzkunden
SLX-Digitalkonferenz: Zukunftswerkstatt 2024

Mehr Umsatz mit Top-Kontakten

Am 7. Mai erfahren Sie, wie Vertriebsteams Leadgenerierung, Leadnurturing und Leadstrategien effizient steuern können.
Erweiterte Suche
Anmelden
nach oben
Autonomous Robots
Erschienen in: Autonomous Robots 3-4/2020

01.06.2019

Competition and cooperation in a community of autonomous agents

verfasst von: Pablo Gómez Esteban, Si Liu, David Ríos Insua, Jorge González-Ortega

Erschienen in: Autonomous Robots | Ausgabe 3-4/2020

Einloggen

Aktivieren Sie unsere intelligente Suche, um passende Fachinhalte oder Patente zu finden.

search-config
loading …

Abstract

Agents that perform intelligent tasks interacting with humans in a seamless manner are becoming a reality. In contexts in which interactions among agents repeat over time, they might evolve from a cooperative to a competitive attitude, and vice versa, depending on environmental factors and other contextual circumstances. We provide a framework to model transitions between competition and cooperation in a community of agents. Competition is dealt with through the paradigm of adversarial risk analysis, which provides a disagreement solution; implicitly, we minimize the distance to such solution. Cooperation is handled through a concept of maximal separation from the disagreement solution. Mixtures of both problems are used to refer to in-between behaviour. We illustrate the ideas with several simulations in relation with a group of robots. Our motivation is the constitution of communities of robotic agents that interact among them and with one or more users.
Vorheriger Artikel Hybrid planning and distributed iterative repair for multi-robot missions with communication losses
Nächster Artikel Auctions for multi-robot task allocation in communication limited environments

Sie haben noch keine Lizenz? Dann Informieren Sie sich jetzt über unsere Produkte:

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

  • über 102.000 Bücher
  • über 537 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

  • Automobil + Motoren
  • Bauwesen + Immobilien
  • Business IT + Informatik
  • Elektrotechnik + Elektronik
  • Energie + Nachhaltigkeit
  • Finance + Banking
  • Management + Führung
  • Marketing + Vertrieb
  • Maschinenbau + Werkstoffe
  • Versicherung + Risiko

Jetzt Wissensvorsprung sichern!

Jetzt informieren

Springer Professional "Technik"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Technik" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

  • über 67.000 Bücher
  • über 390 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

  • Automobil + Motoren
  • Bauwesen + Immobilien
  • Business IT + Informatik
  • Elektrotechnik + Elektronik
  • Energie + Nachhaltigkeit
  • Maschinenbau + Werkstoffe




 

Jetzt Wissensvorsprung sichern!

Jetzt informieren
Anhänge
Nur mit Berechtigung zugänglich
Fußnoten
1
By this, we understand \(x_i \ge d_i\), \(\forall i = 1,\ldots ,n\); we shall also use \(x > d\) meaning \(x_i > d_i\), \(\forall i = 1,\ldots ,n\).
 
2
Since \(w_i^1\) and \(w_i^2\) are complementary, we could use just one of them. However, we preserve both for clarity purposes.
 
Literatur
Gelman, A., Carlin, J. B., Stern, H. S., Dunson, D. B., Vehtari, A., & Rubin, D. B. (1995). Bayesian data analysis (2013th ed.). New York: CRC Press.CrossRef
Busemeyer, J. R., Dimperio, E., & Jessup, R. K. (2007). Integrating emotional processes into decision-making models. In W. D. Gray (Ed.), Integrated models of cognitive systems (pp. 213–229). New York: Oxford University Press.CrossRef
Chesbrough, H. W. (2003). The era of open innovation. MIT Sloan Management Review, 44(3), 35–41.
Clemen, R. T., & Reilly, T. (2004). Making hard decisions with decisiontools (2013th ed.). Mason: Cengage Learning.
Dyer, J. S., & Sarin, R. K. (1979). Measurable multiattribute value functions. Operations Research, 27(4), 810–822.MathSciNetCrossRef
Esteban, P. G., & Ríos Insua, D. (2014). Supporting an autonomous social agent within a competitive environment. Cybernetics and Systems, 45(3), 241–253.CrossRef
Esteban, P. G., & Ríos Insua, D. (2015). Designing societies of robots. In T. V. Guy, M. Karny, & D. H. Wolpert (Eds.), Decision making: Uncertainty, imperfection, deliberation and scalability (pp. 33–53). Cham: Springer.CrossRef
Fong, T., Nourbakhsh, I., & Dautenhahn, K. (2003). A survey of socially interactive robots. Robotics and Autonomous Systems, 42(3–4), 143–166.CrossRef
Gerber, A. (2005). Reference functions and solutions to bargaining problems with and without claims. Social Choice and Welfare, 24(3), 527–541.MathSciNetCrossRef
Gibbons, R. (1992). Game theory for applied economists (1992nd ed.). Princeton: Princeton University Press.CrossRef
González-Ortega, J., Radovic, V., & Ríos Insua, D. (2018). Utility elicitation. In L. C. Dias, A. Morton, & J. Quigley (Eds.), Elicitation: The science and art of structuring judgement (pp. 241–264). Cham: Springer.CrossRef
Hargreaves-Heap, S. P., & Varoufakis, Y. (1995). Game theory: A critical introduction (2004th ed.). New York: Routledge.CrossRef
Harrington, J. E. (2009). Games, strategies and decision making (2014th ed.). New York: Macmillan Publishers.
Harsanyi, J. C. (1982). Comment subjective probability and the theory of games: Comments on kadane and larkey’s paper. Management Science, 29(2), 120–124.CrossRef
Iocchi, L., Holz, D., Ruiz-del-Solar, J., Sugiura, K., & van der Zant, T. (2015). RoboCup@Home: Analysis and results of evolving competitions for domestic and service robots. Artificial Intelligence, 229(1), 258–281.MathSciNetCrossRef
Jefferies, N., Mitchell, C., & Walker, M. (1996). A proposed architecture for trusted third party services. In E. Dawson & J. Golić (Eds.), Cryptography: Policy and algorithms (pp. 98–104). Berlin: Springer.CrossRef
Kadane, J. B., & Larkey, P. D. (1982). Subjective probability and the theory of games. Management Science, 28(2), 113–120.MathSciNetCrossRef
Levy, H. (1998). Stochastic dominance: Investment decision making under uncertainty (2016th ed.). Cham: Springer.CrossRef
Lin, P., Abney, K., & Bekey, G. (2011). Robot ethics: Mapping the issues for a mechanized world. Artificial Intelligence, 175(5–6), 942–949.CrossRef
Lippman, S. A., & McCardle, K. F. (2012). Embedded Nash bargaining: Risk aversion and impatience. Decision Analysis, 9(1), 31–40.MathSciNetCrossRef
Maschler, M., Solan, E., & Zamir, S. (2013). Game theory. New York: Cambridge University Press.CrossRef
Menache, I., & Ozdaglar, A. (2011). Network games: Theory, models, and dynamics. Synthesis Lectures on Communication Networks, 4(1), 1–159.CrossRef
Myerson, R. B. (1991). Game theory: Analysis of conflict (1997th ed.). Cambridge: Harvard University Press.MATH
Nisan, N., Roughgarden, T., Tardos, É., & Vazirani, V. V. (2007). Algorithmic game theory (2007th ed.). New York: Cambridge University Press.CrossRef
Pfingsten, A., & Wagener, A. (2003). Bargaining solutions as social compromises. Theory and Decision, 55(4), 359–389.MathSciNetCrossRef
Raiffa, H. (1982). The art and science of negotiation (2003rd ed.). Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
Raiffa, H., Richardson, J., & Metcalfe, D. (2002). Negotiation analysis: The science and art of collaborative decision making (2002nd ed.). Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
Ríos Insua, D., Banks, D. L., & Ríos, J. (2016). Modeling opponents in adversarial risk analysis. Risk Analysis, 36(4), 742–755.CrossRef
Ríos Insua, D., Ríos, J., & Banks, D. L. (2009). Adversarial risk analysis. Journal of the American Statistical Association, 104(486), 841–854.MathSciNetCrossRef
Rothkopf, M. H. (2007). Decision analysis: The right tool for auctions. Decision Analysis, 4(3), 167–172.CrossRef
Stahl, D. O., & Wilson, P. W. (1995). On players’ models of other players: Theory and experimental evidence. Games and Economic Behavior, 10(1), 218–254.MathSciNetCrossRef
Thomson, W. (1981). Nash’s bargaining solution and utilitarian choice rules. Econometrica, 49(2), 535–538.MathSciNetCrossRef
Thomson, W. (1994). Cooperative models of bargaining. In R. Aumann & S. Hart (Eds.), Handbook of game theory with economic applications (Vol. 2, pp. 1237–1284). Amsterdam: North-Holland.CrossRef
Thomson, W. (2010). Bargaining and the theory of cooperative games: John Nash and beyond (2010th ed.). Northampton: Edward Elgar Publishing.CrossRef
Metadaten
Titel
Competition and cooperation in a community of autonomous agents
verfasst von
Pablo Gómez Esteban
Si Liu
David Ríos Insua
Jorge González-Ortega
Publikationsdatum
01.06.2019
Verlag
Springer US
Erschienen in
Autonomous Robots / Ausgabe 3-4/2020
Print ISSN: 0929-5593
Elektronische ISSN: 1573-7527
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s10514-019-09867-y

Weitere Artikel der Ausgabe 3-4/2020

Autonomous Robots 3-4/2020 Zur Ausgabe

OriginalPaper

Automated synthesis of decentralized controllers for robot swarms from high-level temporal logic specifications

OriginalPaper

CARE: Cooperative Autonomy for Resilience and Efficiency of robot teams for complete coverage of unknown environments under robot failures

EditorialNotes

Guest editorial: special issue on multi-robot and multi-agent systems

OriginalPaper

Air-ground cooperative topometric mapping of traversable ground

OriginalPaper

Humans interacting with multi-robot systems: a natural affect-based approach

OriginalPaper

Distributed coverage in mobile sensor networks without location information

Neuer Inhalt

    Bildnachweise