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
Themenseiten
Organisationspsychologie Projektmanagement Marketing Smart Manufacturing
Bücher
Zeitschriften
Weitere Formate
Podcasts Webinare Technik Webinare Wirtschaft Kongresse Veranstaltungskalender Awards
Jetzt Einzelzugang starten
Zugang für Unternehmen
Referenzkunden
ATZ-Fachkongress

Chassis.tech plus 2024


4 Kongresse in einer Veranstaltung

Treffen Sie in München die Fachleute von Chassis, Lenkung, Bremsen sowie Reifen/Räder.
Erweiterte Suche
Anmelden
nach oben
Knowledge and Information Systems
Erschienen in: Knowledge and Information Systems 2/2015

01.11.2015 | Regular Paper

Heuristics for using CP-nets in utility-based negotiation without knowing utilities

verfasst von: Reyhan Aydoğan, Tim Baarslag, Koen V. Hindriks, Catholijn M. Jonker, Pınar Yolum

Erschienen in: Knowledge and Information Systems | Ausgabe 2/2015

Einloggen

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

search-config
loading …

Abstract

CP-nets have proven to be an effective representation for capturing preferences. However, their use in automated negotiation is not straightforward because, typically, preferences in CP-nets are partially ordered and negotiating agents are required to compare any two outcomes based on a request and an offer in order to negotiate effectively. If agents know how to generate total orders from their CP-nets, they can make this comparison. This paper proposes heuristics that enable the use of CP-nets in utility-based negotiations by generating total orderings. To validate this approach, the paper compares the performance of CP-nets with our heuristics with the performance of UCP-nets that are equipped with complete preference orderings. Our results show that we can achieve comparable performance in terms of the outcome utility. More importantly, one of our proposed heuristics can achieve this performance with significantly smaller number of interactions compared to UCP-nets.
Vorheriger Artikel Anytime density-based clustering of complex data
Nächster Artikel Effective record linkage for mining campaign contribution data

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 "Wirtschaft"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Wirtschaft" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

  • über 67.000 Bücher
  • über 340 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

  • Bauwesen + Immobilien
  • Business IT + Informatik
  • Finance + Banking
  • Management + Führung
  • Marketing + Vertrieb
  • 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
Literatur
1.
Aydoğan R, Baarslag T, Hindriks K, Jonker CM, Yolum P (2013) Heuristic-based approaches for CP-nets in negotiation. In: Ito T, Zhang M, Robu V, Matsuo T (eds) Complex automated negotiations: theories, models, and software competitions, vol 435 of studies in computational intelligence, pp 113–123
2.
Aydoğan R, Tasdemir N, Yolum P (2010) Reasoning and negotiating with complex preferences using CP-nets. In: Aalst W, Mylopoulos J, Sadeh NM, Shaw MJ, Szyperski C, Ketter W, Poutr H, Sadeh N, Shehory O, Walsh W (eds) Agent-mediated electronic commerce and trading agent design and analysis, vol 44 of lecture notes in business information processing, pp 15–28
3.
Aydoğan R, Yolum P (2010) Effective negotiation with partial preference information. In: Proceedings of the ninth international joint conference on autonomous agents and multiagent systems (AAMAS). Toronto, Canada, pp 1605–1606
4.
Aydoğan R, Yolum P (2012) Learning opponents preferences for effective negotiation: an approach based on concept learning. J Auton Agents Multi-Agent Syst 24(1):104–140CrossRef
5.
Baarslag T, Hindriks K, Jonker CM, Kraus S, Lin R (2010) The first automated negotiating agents competition (ANAC 2010). In: Ito T, Zhang M, Robu V, Fatima S, Matsuo T (eds) New trends in agent-based complex automated negotiations, series of studies in computational intelligence (to appear). Springer, Berlin
6.
Boutilier C, Bacchus F, Brafman RI (2001) UCP-networks: a directed graphical representation of conditional utilities. In: Proceedings of the seventeenth annual conference on uncertainty in artificial intelligence. Seattle, USA, pp 56–64
7.
Boutilier C, Brafman RI, Domshlak C, Hoos HH, Poole D (2004) CP-nets: a tool for representing and reasoning with conditional ceteris paribus preference statements. J Artif Intell Res 21:135–191MATHMathSciNet
8.
Brin S, Page L (1998) The anatomy of a large-scale hypertextual web search engine. Comput Netw ISDN Syst 30(1–7):107–117CrossRef
9.
Chalamish M, Kraus S (2007) Automed: an automated mediator for bilateral negotiations under time constraints. In: Proceedings of the sixth international joint conference on autonomous agents and multiagent systems, pp 248:1–3
10.
Chen S, Weiss G (2012) A novel strategy for efficient negotiation in complex environments. In: Timm IJ, Guttmann C (eds) ‘MATES’, vol 7598 of lecture notes in computer science. Springer, Berlin, pp 68–82
11.
Coehoorn RM, Jennings NR (2004) Learning on opponent’s preferences to make effective multi-issue negotiation trade-offs. In: Proceedings of the sixth international conference on electronic commerce, pp 59–68
12.
Dan Pelleg AM (2000) X-means: extending K-means with efficient estimation of the number of clusters. In: Proceedings of the seventeenth international conference on machine learning. Morgan Kaufmann, San Francisco, pp 727–734
13.
Domshlak C, Prestwich SD, Rossi F, Venable KB, Walsh T (2006) Hard and soft constraints for reasoning about qualitative conditional preferences. J Heuristics 12(4–5):263–285MATHCrossRef
14.
Faratin P, Sierra C, Jennings NR (1998) Negotiation decision functions for autonomous agents. Int J Robot Auton Syst 24(3–4):159–182CrossRef
15.
Faratin P, Sierra C, Jennings NR (2002) Using similarity criteria to make issue trade-offs in automated negotiations. Artif Intell 142:205–237MathSciNetCrossRef
16.
Fatima S, Wooldridge M, Jennings N (2007) On efficient procedures for multi-issue negotiation. In: Fasli M, Shehory O (eds) Automated negotiation and strategy design for electronic markets, vol 4452 of lecture notes in computer science. Springer, Berlin, pp 31–45
17.
Ficici SG, Pfeffer A (2008) Simultaneously modeling human’s preferences and their beliefs about other’s preferences. In: Proceedings of the 7th international joint conference on autonomous agents and multiagent systems-vol 1, AAMAS ’08, pp 323–330
18.
Fishburn PC (1970) Utility theory for decision making. Wiley, New YorkMATH
19.
Fisher RA (1959) Statistical methods and scientific inference, 2nd edn. Hafner Publishing Co., New York
20.
Gode DK, Sunder S (1993) Allocative efficiency of markets with zero-intelligence traders: market as a partial substitute for individual rationality. J Polit Econ 101(1):119–137CrossRef
21.
Hao J, Leung H-F (2012) Abines: an adaptive bilateral negotiating strategy over multiple items. In: Proceedings of the the 2012 IEEE/WIC/ACM international joint conferences on web intelligence and intelligent agent technology, vol 02’, WI-IAT ’12. IEEE Computer Society, Washington, DC, USA, pp 95–102
22.
Hindriks K, Jonker CM, Kraus S, Lin R, Tykhonov D (2009) Genius: negotiation environment for heterogeneous agents. In: Proceedings of the eighth international joint conference on autonomous agents and multiagent systems (AAMAS), vol 2, pp 1397–1398
23.
Hindriks K, Tykhonov D (2008) Opponent modelling in automated multi-issue negotiation using bayesian learning. In: Proceedings of the seventh international joint conference on autonomous agents and multiagent systems (AAMAS). Estorial, Portugal, pp 331–338
24.
Hindriks KV, Tykhonov D (2010) Towards a quality assessment method for learning preference profiles in negotiation. In: Aalst W, Mylopoulos J, Sadeh NM, Shaw MJ, Szyperski C, Ketter W, Poutr H, Sadeh N, Shehory O, Walsh W (eds) Agent-mediated electronic commerce and trading agent design and analysis, vol 44 of lecture notes in business information processing, pp 46–59
25.
Jain R, Purohit DGN (2011) Page ranking algorithms for web mining. Int J Comput Appl 13(5):22–25
26.
Jennings NR, Faratin P, Lomuscio AR, Parsons S, Sierra C, Wooldridge M (2001) Automated negotiation: prospects, methods and challenges. Int J Group Decis Negot 10(2):199–215CrossRef
27.
Jonker CM, Robu V, Treur J (2007) An agent architecture for multi-attribute negotiation using incomplete preference information. JAAMAS 15(2):221–252
28.
Klos T, Somefun K, Poutre HL (2011) Automated interactive sales processes. IEEE Intell Syst 26(4):54–61CrossRef
29.
Li M, Vo QB, Kowalczyk R (2010) An efficient procedure for collective decision-making with CP-nets. In: Proceeding of the 19th European conference on artificial intelligence, Lisbon, Portugal, pp 375–380
30.
Lin R, Kraus S, Baarslag T, Tykhonov D, Hindriks K, Jonker CM (2014) Genius: an integrated environment for supporting the design of generic automated negotiators . Comput Intell 30(1):48–70
31.
Luo X, Jennings NR, Shadbolt N, Leung H, Lee JH (2003) A fuzzy constraint based model for bilateral, multi-issue negotiations in semi-competitive environments. Artif Intell 148(1–2):53–102MATHMathSciNetCrossRef
32.
Raiffa H (1982) The art and science of negotiation. Harvard University Press, Cambridge
33.
Rossi F, Venable KB, Walsh T (2002) CP-networks: semantics, complexity, approximations and extensions. In: Proceedings of the forth international workshop on soft constraints (Soft-02) in CP-2002, USA
34.
Rossi F, Venable KB, Walsh T (2004) mCP nets: representing and reasoning with preferences of multiple agents. In: Proceeding of the nineteenth national conference on artificial intelligence, pp 729–734
35.
Russell SJ, Norvig P (1995) Artificial intelligence: a modern approach. Prentice Hall, Egnlewood CliffsMATH
36.
Sierra C, Faratin P, Jennings N (1997) A service-oriented negotiation model between autonomous agents. In: Boman M, van de Velde W (eds) Proceedings of the eighth European workshop on modelling autonomous agents in multi-agent world, MAAMAW’97’, vol 1237 of lecture notes in artificial intelligence. Springer, Berlin, pp 17–35
Metadaten
Titel
Heuristics for using CP-nets in utility-based negotiation without knowing utilities
verfasst von
Reyhan Aydoğan
Tim Baarslag
Koen V. Hindriks
Catholijn M. Jonker
Pınar Yolum
Publikationsdatum
01.11.2015
Verlag
Springer London
Erschienen in
Knowledge and Information Systems / Ausgabe 2/2015
Print ISSN: 0219-1377
Elektronische ISSN: 0219-3116
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s10115-014-0798-z

Weitere Artikel der Ausgabe 2/2015

Knowledge and Information Systems 2/2015 Zur Ausgabe

Regular Paper

Effective record linkage for mining campaign contribution data

Regular Paper

Exploiting semantics for filtering and searching knowledge in a software development context

Regular Paper

Distributed reasoning with coupled ontologies: the representation framework

Regular Paper

Anytime density-based clustering of complex data

Regular Paper

Integration of multiple network views in Wikipedia

Regular Paper

A unified statistical framework for crowd labeling

Premium Partner

    Bildnachweise