Skip to main content
Springer Nature Link
Log in

A Real-Time Negotiation Model and A Multi-Agent Sensor Network Implementation

  • Published:
Autonomous Agents and Multi-Agent Systems Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

This paper describes a negotiation model that incorporates real-time issues for autonomous agents. This model consists of two important ideas: a real-time logical negotiation protocol and a case-based negotiation model. The protocol integrates a real-time Belief-Desire-Intention (BDI) model, a temporal logic model, and communicative acts for negotiation. This protocol explicitly defines the logical and temporal relationships of different knowledge states, facilitating real-time designs such as multi-threaded processing, state profiling and updating, and a set of real-time enabling functional predicates in our implementation. To further support the protocol, we use a case-based reasoning model for negotiation strategy selection. An agent learns from its past experience by deriving a negotiation strategy from the most similar and useful case to its current situation. Guided by the strategy, the agent negotiates with its partners using an argumentation-based negotiation protocol. The model is time and situation aware such that each agent changes its negotiation behavior according to the progress and status of the ongoing negotiation and its current agent profile. We apply the negotiation model to a resource allocation problem and obtain promising results.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Subscribe and save

Springer+ Basic
$34.99 /Month
  • Get 10 units per month
  • Download Article/Chapter or eBook
  • 1 Unit = 1 Article or 1 Chapter
  • Cancel anytime
Subscribe now

Buy Now

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

Explore related subjects

Discover the latest articles, news and stories from top researchers in related subjects.

References

  1. J. F. Allen (1983) ArticleTitle“Maintaining knowledge about temporal intervals” Commun. ACM 26 IssueID11 832–843 Occurrence Handle10.1145/182.358434

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. J. F. Allen (1991) ArticleTitle“Time and time again: the many ways to represent time” Int. J. Intell. Syst. 6 IssueID4 341–355

    Google Scholar 

  3. J. F. Allen G. Ferguson (1994) ArticleTitle“Actions and events in interval temporal logic” J. Logic Comput. Spl. Issue Actions Proces. 4 IssueID5 531–579

    Google Scholar 

  4. L. Amgoud, S. Parsons, and N. Maudet, “Arguments, dialogue, and negotiation,” in Proceedings of the 14th European Conference on Artificial Intelligence, Berlin, Germany, 2000

  5. L. Amgoud, N. Maudet, and S. Parsons, “Modelling dialogues using argumentation,” in Proceedings of the 4th Conference on Multi-Agent Systems (ICMAS’00), Boston, MA, USA, 2000

  6. L. Amgoud and S. Parsons, “Agent dialogues with conflicting preferences,” in Proceedings of the Workshop on Agent Theories, Architectures and Languages (ATAL’01), Seattle, WA, USA, 2001

  7. A. Bolotov M. Fisher (1999) ArticleTitle“A clausal resolution method for CTL branching time temporal logic” J. Exp. Theor. Artif. Intell. 11 77–93 Occurrence Handle10.1080/095281399146625

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. F. Brazier and J. Treur, “Compositional modelling of reflective agents,” in Proceedings of the 10th Knowledge Acquisition for Knowledge-Based Systems Workshop (KAW’96), Banff, Alberta, Canada, 1996

  9. P. R. Cohen H. J. Levesque (1990) ArticleTitle“Intention is choice with commitment” Artif. Intell. 42 IssueID2–3 213–261 Occurrence Handle10.1016/0004-3702(90)90055-5

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. P. R. Cohen and H. J. Levesque, “Confirmation and joint action,” in Proceedings of IJCAI-91, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia, 1991, pp. 951–959

  11. K. Decker and V. Lesser, “A one-shot dynamic coordination algorithm for distributed sensor networks,” in Proceedings of AAAI-93, 1993, pp. 210–216

  12. K. Decker and V. Lesser, “Designing a family of coordination algorithms,” in Proceedings of ICMAS-95, San Francisco, CA, 1995, pp. 73–80

  13. J. E. Doran S. Franklin S. N. R. Jennings T. J. Norman (1997) ArticleTitle“On cooperation in multi-agent systems” Knowl. Eng. Rev. 12 IssueID3 309–314 Occurrence Handle10.1017/S0269888997003111

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. E. H. Durfee V. Lesser (1991) ArticleTitle“Partial global planning: a coordination framework for distributed hypothesis formation” IEEE Trans. Syst. Man Cybernet. 21 IssueID5 1167–1183 Occurrence Handle10.1109/21.120067

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. P. Faratin C. Sierra J. R. Jennings (1998) ArticleTitle“Negotiation decision functions for autonomous agents” Int. J. Robot. Autonomous Syst. 24 IssueID3–4 159–182 Occurrence Handle10.1016/S0921-8890(98)00029-3

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. J. R. Galliers, “A strategic framework for multi-agent cooperative dialogue,” in Proceedings of ECAI’88, Munich, Germany, 1998, pp. 415–420

  17. P. J. Gmytrasiewicz E. H. Durfee (2000) ArticleTitle“Rational coordination in multi-agent environments” Autonomous Agents and Multiagent Systems 3 IssueID4 319–350 Occurrence Handle10.1023/A:1010028119149

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. B. Grosz and S. Kraus, “Collaborative plans for group activities,” in Proceedings of the 1993 International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence (IJCAI-93), San Mateo, CA, 1993, pp. 367–373

  19. B. Grosz S. Kraus (1996) ArticleTitle“Collaborative plans for complex group action” Artif. Intell. 86 IssueID2 269–357 Occurrence Handle10.1016/0004-3702(95)00103-4

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. B. J. Grosz and S. Kraus, “The evolution of SharedPlans,” in Rao, A. and M. Wooldridge (eds.), Foundations and Theories of Rational Agency, Kluwer Academic Publishing, 1998

  21. H. Jakobovits and D. Vermeir, “Dialectic semantics for argumentation frameworks,” in Proceedings of the Seventh International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Law, 1999, pp. 53–62

  22. N. R. Jennings (1993) ArticleTitle“Controlling cooperative problem solving in industrial multi-agent systems using joint intentions” Artif. Intell. 75 195–240 Occurrence Handle10.1016/0004-3702(94)00020-2

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. J. Kolodner (1993) Case-Based Reasoning Morgan Kaufmann San Mateo, CA

    Google Scholar 

  24. S. Kraus (1997) ArticleTitle“Beliefs, time, and incomplete information in multiple encounter negotiations among autonomous agents” Ann. Math. Artif. Intell. 20 IssueID1–4 111–159 Occurrence Handle10.1023/A:1018928310720

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. S. Kraus K. Sycara A. Evenchik (1998) ArticleTitle“Reaching agreements through argumentation: a logical model and implementation” Artif. Intell. J. 104 IssueID1–2 1–69 Occurrence Handle10.1016/S0004-3702(98)00078-2

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. S. Kraus J. Wilkenfeld (1993) ArticleTitle“A strategic negotiations model with applications to an international crisis” IEEE Trans. Syst. Man Cybernet. 23 IssueID1 313–323 Occurrence Handle10.1109/21.214793

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. S. Kraus J. Wilkenfeld G. Zlotkin (1995) ArticleTitle“Multiagent negotiation under time constraints” Artif. Intell. 75 297–345 Occurrence Handle10.1016/0004-3702(94)00021-R

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. P. Krause S. Ambler M. Elvang-Gøransson J. Fox (1995) ArticleTitle“A logic of argumentation for reasoning under uncertainty” Comput. intell. 11 113–131

    Google Scholar 

  29. B. Lâasri H. Lâasri S. Lander V. Lesser (1992) ArticleTitle“A generic model for intelligent negotiating agents” Int. J. Intell. Coop. Inform. Syst. 1 IssueID2 291–317 Occurrence Handle10.1142/S0218215792000210

    Article  Google Scholar 

  30. S. Lander and V. Lesser, “Customizing distributed search among agents with heterogeneous knowledge,” in Proceedings of CIKM-92, Baltimore, MD, 1992, pp. 335–344

  31. S. Lander and V. Lesser, “Understanding the role of negotiation in distributed search among heterogeneous agents,” in Proceedings of IJCAI-93, Chambéry, France, 1992, pp. 438–444

  32. J. Lawton (2003) “The Radsim simulator” V. Lesser C. L. Ortiz SuffixJr. M. Tambe (Eds) Distributed Sensor Networks: A Multiagent Perspective Kluwer Academic Publishers The Netherlands 11–20

    Google Scholar 

  33. V. Lesser D. Corkill (1983) ArticleTitle“The distributed vehicle monitoring testbed: a tool for investigating distributed problem solving networks” AI Magazine 4 IssueID3 15–33

    Google Scholar 

  34. V. Lesser, C. L. Ortiz Jr., M. Tambe (eds.), Distributed Sensor Networks: A Multiagent Perspective, Norwell, MA: Kluwer.

  35. N. Matos, C. Sierra, and J. R. Jennings, “Negotiation strategies: an evolutionary approach,” in Proceedings of International Conference on Multiagent Systems (ICMAS), Paris, France, 1998, pp.182–189

  36. P. Noriega and C. Sierra, “Towards layered dialogical agents,” in Proceedings of ECAI Workshop on ATAL’96, Budapest, Hungary, 1996, pp. 157–171

  37. C. Norman, V. Lesser, and Q. Long, “Distributed Sensor Interpretation: Modeling Agent Interpretations in DRESUN,” in University of Massachusetts Technical Report, UMCS 93-75, 1993

  38. M. J. Osborne A. Rubinstein (1994) A Course in Game Theory MIT Press Cambridge, MA

    Google Scholar 

  39. S. Parsons and N. R. Jennings, “Negotiation through argumentation—a preliminary report,” in Proceedings of ICMAS-96, Kyoto, Japan, 1996, pp. 267–274

  40. S. Parsons C. Sierra N. R. Jennings (1998) ArticleTitle“Agents that reason and negotiate by arguing” J. Logic Comput. 8 IssueID3 261–292 Occurrence Handle10.1093/logcom/8.3.261

    Article  Google Scholar 

  41. H. V. D. Parunak, A. D. Baker, and S. J. Clark, “The AARIA agent architecture: an example of requirements-driven agent-based system design,” in Proceedings of the 1st International Conference on Autonomous Agents (ICMAS’97), 1997, pp. 482–483

  42. H. Prakken, “From logic to dialectics in legal argument,” in Proceedings of the Fifth International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Law, 1995, pp. 165–174

  43. A. Rao and M. Georgeff, “Modeling rational agents within a BDI-architecture,” in Proceedings of the 2nd International Conference on Principles of Knowledge Representation and Reasoning, 1991, pp. 473–484

  44. A. Rao and M. Georgeff, “BDI agents: from theory to practice,” in Proceedings of ICMAS-95, San Francisco, CA, 1995, pp. 312–319

  45. A. Rao M. Georgeff (1998) ArticleTitle“Decision procedures for BDI logics” J. Logic Comput. 8 IssueID3 293–342 Occurrence Handle10.1093/logcom/8.3.293

    Article  Google Scholar 

  46. J. S. Rosenschein G. Zlotkin (1994) Rules of Encounter MIT Press Cambridge, MA

    Google Scholar 

  47. J. S. Rosenschein G. Zlotkin (1994) ArticleTitle“Designing conventions for automated negotiation” AI Magazine 15 IssueID3 29–46

    Google Scholar 

  48. T. W. Sandholm and V. R. Lesser, “Coalition formation among bounded rational agents,” in Proceedings of IJCAI-95, Montreal, Canada, 1995, pp. 662–669

  49. M. Singh, “Developing formal specifications to coordinate heterogeneous autonomous agents,” in Proceedings of the 3rd International Conference on Multiagent Systems (ICMAS’98), 1998, pp. 261–268

  50. L.-K. Soh, H. Sevay, and C. Tsatsoulis, “A satisficing, learning, and negotiated coalition formation architecture,” in V. Lesser, M. Tambe and C. Ortiz (eds.), Distributed Sensor Networks: A Multiagent Perspective, Kluwer Publishing, Chapter 7, 2003, pp.109–138

  51. L.-K. Soh and C. Tsatsoulis, “Reflective negotiating agents for real-time multisensor target tracking,” in Proceedings of the International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence (IJCAI’01), August 6–11, Seattle, WA, 2001, pp. 1121–1127

  52. L.-K. Soh and C. Tsatsoulis, “Agent-based argumentative negotiations with case-based reasoning,” in Working Notes of the AAAI Fall Symposium Series on Negotiation Methods for Autonomous Cooperative Systems, November 1–4, North Falmouth, MA, 2001, pp. 16–25

  53. B. Srinivasan, S. Pather, R. Hill, F. Ansari, and D. Niehaus, “A firm real-time system implementation using commercial off-the shelf hardware and free software,” in Proceedings of RTAS-98, June Denver, CO, 1998, pp. 112–119

  54. K. Sycara, M. Paolucci, M. van Velsen, and J. Giampapa, “The RETSINA MAS infrastructure,” Technical Report CMU-RI-TR-01-05, Robotics Institute Technical Report, Carnegie Mellon, 2001

  55. M. Tambe (1997) ArticleTitle“Towards flexible teamwork” J. Artif. Intell. Res. 7 83–124

    Google Scholar 

  56. S. A. Vere (1983) ArticleTitle“Planning in time: windows and durations for activities and goals” IEEE Trans. Pattern Anal. Machine Intell. 5 IssueID3 246–267

    Google Scholar 

  57. M. Wooldridge N. Jennings (1995) ArticleTitle“Intelligent agents: theory and practice” Knowl. Eng. Rev. 10 IssueID2 114–152

    Google Scholar 

  58. D. Zeng K. Sycara (1998) ArticleTitle“Bayesian learning in negotiation” Int. J. Human-Comput. Stud. 48 125–141 Occurrence Handle10.1006/ijhc.1997.0164

    Article  Google Scholar 

  59. G. Zlotkin and J. S. Rosenschein, “Negotiation and task sharing among autonomous agents in cooperative domains,” in Proceedings of IJCAI-89, Detroit, MI, August, 1989, pp. 912–917

  60. G. Zlotkin J. S. Rosenschein (1991) ArticleTitle“Cooperation and conflict resolution via negotiation among autonomous agents in noncooperative domains” IEEE Trans. Syst. Man Cybernet. Spl. Issue Distributed Artif. Intell. 21 IssueID6 1317–1324

    Google Scholar 

  61. G. Zlotkin J. S. Rosenschein (1996) ArticleTitle“Mechanism design for automated negotiation, and its application to task oriented domains” Artif. Intell. 86 IssueID2 195–244 Occurrence Handle10.1016/0004-3702(95)00104-2

    Article  Google Scholar 

  62. G. Zlotkin J. S. Rosenschein (1996) ArticleTitle“Mechanisms for automated negotiation in state oriented domains” J. Artif. Intell. Res. 5 163–238

    Google Scholar 

  63. G. Zlotkin J. S. Rosenschein (1996) ArticleTitle“Compromise in negotiation: exploiting worth functions over states” Artif. Intell. 84 IssueID1–2 151–176 Occurrence Handle10.1016/0004-3702(95)00037-2

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Computer Science and Engineering, University of Nebraska, 256 Avery Hall, Lincoln, NE, 68588-0115, USA

    Leen-Kiat Soh

  2. Information and Telecommunication Technology Center (ITTC), Department of Electrical Engineering and Computer Science, University of Kansas, Nichols Hall, 2335 Irving Hill Road, Lawrence, KS, 66045-7612, USA

    Costas Tsatsoulis

Authors
  1. Leen-Kiat Soh
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author inPubMed Google Scholar

  2. Costas Tsatsoulis
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author inPubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Leen-Kiat Soh.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Soh, LK., Tsatsoulis, C. A Real-Time Negotiation Model and A Multi-Agent Sensor Network Implementation. Auton Agent Multi-Agent Syst 11, 215–271 (2005). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10458-005-0539-5

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10458-005-0539-5

Key words