Abstract
Autonomous entities in artificial societies are only willing to cooperate with entities they trust. Reputation systems keep track of the entities’ behavior and, thus, are a widely used means to support trust formation. In a P2P network, the reputation system needs to be distributed to the individual entities. In previous work, we have shown that some of the limitations of distributed reputation systems can be overcome by making use of hard evidence. In this paper, we take this idea one step further by deriving beliefs of others’ trustworthiness from one’s own experiences and the available hard evidence. For this purpose, we justify why a self-interested autonomous entity may choose to behave according to the norms of the system designer. As a consequence, the proposed belief model does not only incorporate behavioral beliefs but also beliefs regarding the normativeness of an entity. We prescribe how beliefs are revised if new evidence becomes available. The introduced models for recommendations and belief formation enable us to prove that self-interested entities always issue truthful recommendations regarding transactional behavior. The simulative evaluation shows that a self-interested entity can be expected to be normative and, thus, to comply with our system design.
The work done for this paper is funded by the German Research Community (DFG) in the context of the priority program (SPP) no. 1140. The authors would like to thank Michael Klein, Jens Nimis and Sokshee Goh for their comments on this paper. In addition, we are grateful for Peter Reiher’s comments on the legal obstacles for tampering software.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Preview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
References
Buchegger, S., Boudec, J.Y.L.: A robust reputation system for P2P and mobile ad-hoc networks. In: Second Workshop on the Economics of Peer-to-Peer Systems (2004)
Despotovic, Z., Aberer, K.: A probabilistic approach to predict peers’ performance in P2P networks. In: Klusch, M., Ossowski, S., Kashyap, V., Unland, R. (eds.) CIA 2004. LNCS (LNAI), vol. 3191, pp. 62–76. Springer, Heidelberg (2004)
Kamvar, S.D., Schlosser, M.T., Garcia-Molina, H.: The EigenTrust algorithm for reputation management in P2P networks. In: WWW 2003 (2003)
Castelfranchi, C., Conte, R., Paolucci, M.: Normative reputation and the costs of compliance. Journal of Artificial Societies and Social Simulation 1 (1998)
Obreiter, P.: A case for evidence-aware distributed reputation systems. In: Jensen, C., Poslad, S., Dimitrakos, T. (eds.) iTrust 2004. LNCS, vol. 2995, pp. 33–47. Springer, Heidelberg (2004)
Obreiter, P., Nimis, J.: A taxonomy of incentive patterns - the design space of incentives for cooperation. In: Moro, G., Sartori, C., Singh, M.P. (eds.) AP2PC 2003. LNCS (LNAI), vol. 2872, pp. 89–100. Springer, Heidelberg (2004)
Obreiter, P., Fähnrich, S., Nimis, J.: How social structure improves distributed reputation systems - three hypotheses. In: Moro, G., Bergamaschi, S., Aberer, K. (eds.) AP2PC 2004. LNCS (LNAI), vol. 3601. Springer, Heidelberg (2005)
Jurca, R., Faltings, B.: Towards incentive-compatible reputation management. In: Falcone, R., Barber, S., Korba, L., Singh, M.P. (eds.) AAMAS 2002. LNCS (LNAI), vol. 2631, pp. 138–147. Springer, Heidelberg (2003)
Jones, P.: Software, reverse engineering and the law (2005), http://lwn.net/Articles/134642/
Hoffman, I.: Derivative works (2002), http://www.ivanhoffman.com/derivative2.html
Council of the European Communities: Software directive – council directive on the legal protection of computer programs (91/250/EEC) (1991)
Linn, C., Debray, S.: Obfuscation of executable code to improve resistance to static disassembly. In: Proceedings of the 10th ACM Conference on Computer and Communication Security, pp. 290–299 (2003)
Tuomela, R.: The Importance of Us: A Philosophical Study of Basic Social Norms. Stanford University Press, Stanford (1995)
Mui, L., Halberstadt, A., Mohtashemi, M.: Notions of reputation in multi-agents systems: A review. In: Proceedings of the First International Joint Conference on Autonomous Agents and Multiagent Systems (AAMAS 2002), Bologna, Italy (2002)
Helton, J.: Uncertainty and sensitivity analysis in the presence of stochastic and subjective uncertainty. Journal of Statistical Computation and Simulation 57, 3–76 (1997)
Bacchus, F.: Probabilistic belief logics. In: Proceedings of European Conference on Artificial Intelligence (ECAI 1990), pp. 59–64 (1990)
Josang, A., Ismail, R.: The beta reputation system. In: 15th Bled Conference on Electronic Commerce, Bled, Slovenia (2002)
Kinateder, M., Rothermel, K.: Architecture and algorithms for a distributed reputation system. In: Nixon, P., Terzis, S. (eds.) iTrust 2003. LNCS, vol. 2692, pp. 1–16. Springer, Heidelberg (2003)
Rao, A.S., Georgeff, M.P.: Modeling rational agents within a BDI-architecture. In: Allen, J., Fikes, R., Sandewall, E. (eds.) 2nd Intl. Conference on Principles of Knowledge Representation and Reasoning, pp. 473–484. Morgan Kaufmann, San Francisco (1991)
Rasmusen, E.: Games and Information: An Introduction to Game Theory. Oxford Blackwell, Malden (1989)
Klein, M.: DIANEmu – a java-based generic simulation environment for distributed protocols. Technical Report 2003-7, Universität Karlsruhe, Faculty of Informatics (2003)
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2006 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg
About this paper
Cite this paper
Obreiter, P., König-Ries, B. (2006). A New View on Normativeness in Distributed Reputation Systems. In: Despotovic, Z., Joseph, S., Sartori, C. (eds) Agents and Peer-to-Peer Computing. AP2PC 2005. Lecture Notes in Computer Science(), vol 4118. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/11925941_2
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/11925941_2
Publisher Name: Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg
Print ISBN: 978-3-540-49025-8
Online ISBN: 978-3-540-68967-6
eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)