Raz Lin
Skip Abstract Section
Abstract
Exciting research in the design of automated negotiators is making great progress.
- Bargaining negotiations course; https://www.irwaonline.org/eweb/dynamicpage.aspx?webcode=205 (2008).Google Scholar
- Bolton, G. A comparative model of bargaining: Theory and evidence. American Economic Review 81, 5 (1989), 1096--1136.Google Scholar
- Byde, A., Yearworth, M., Chen, Y.-K., and Bartolini, C. AutONA: A system for automated multiple 1-1 negotiation. In Proceedings of the 2003 IEEE International Conference on Electronic Commerce (2003), 59--67. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Charness, G. and Rabin, M. Understanding social preferences with simple tests. The Quarterly Journal of Economics 117, 3 (2002), 817--869.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Chavez, A. and Maes, P. Kasbah: An agent marketplace for buying and selling goods. In Proceedings of the first international Conference on the Practical Application of Intelligent Agents and Multi-Agent Technology (1996), 75--90.Google Scholar
- Erev, I. and Roth, A. Predicting how people play games: Reinforcement learning in experimental games with unique, mixed strategy equilibrium. American Economic Review 88, 4 (1998), 848--881.Google Scholar
- Farrell, J. and Rabin, M. Cheap talk. Journal of Economic Perspectives 10, 3 (1996), 103--118.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Ficici, S. and Pfeffer, A. Modeling how humans reason about others with partial information. In Proceedings of the 7th International Conference on Autonomous Agents and Multiagent Systems (2008), 315--322. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Fisher, R. and Ury, W. Getting to Yes: Negotiating Agreement without Giving In. Penguin Books, 1991.Google Scholar
- Gal, Y., Pfeffer, A., Marzo, F. and Grosz, B.J. Learning social preferences in games. In Proceedings of the National Conference on Artificial Intelligence (2004), 226--231. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Grossklags, J. and Schmidt, C. Software agents and market (in) efficiency: a human trader experiment. IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics, Part C: Applications and Reviews 36, 1 (2006), 56--67. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Grosz, B., Kraus, S., Talman, S. and Stossel, B. The influence of social dependencies on decision-making: Initial investigations with a new game. In Proceedings of 3rd International Joint Conference on Multiagent Systems (2004), 782--789. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Hindriks, K., Jonker, C. and Tykhonov, D. Towards an open negotiation architecture for heterogeneous agents. In Proceedings for the 12th International Workshop on Cooperative Information Agents. LNAI, 5180 (2008), Springer, NY, 264--279. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Hoppman, P.T. The Negotiation Process and the Resolution of International Conflicts. University of South Carolina Press, Columbia, SC, May 1996.Google Scholar
- Jonker, CM., Robu, V., and Treur, J. An agent architecture for multi-attribute negotiation using incomplete preference information. Autonomous Agents and Multi-Agent Systems 15, 2 (2007), 221--252. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Katz, R. and Kraus, S. Efficient agents for cliff-edge environments with a large set of decision options. In Proceedings of the 5th International Conference on Autonomous Agents and Multi-Agent Systems (2006), 697--704. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Katz, R. and Kraus, S. Gender-sensitive automated negotiators. In Proceedings of the 22nd National Conference on Artificial Intelligence (2007), 821--826. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Keeney, R. and Raiffa, H. Decisions with Multiple Objective: Preferences and Value Tradeoffs. John Wiley, NY, 1976.Google Scholar
- Kenny, P., Hartholt, A., Gratch, J., Swartout, W., Traum, D., Marsella, S. and Piepol, D. Building interactive virtual humans for training environments. In Proceedings of Interservice/Industry Training, Simulation and Education Conference (2007).Google Scholar
- Kraus, S. Strategic Negotiation in Multiagent Environments. MIT Press, Cambridge Ma, 2001. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Kraus, S., Hoz-Weiss, P., Wilkenfeld, S., Andersen, D.R., and Pate, A. Resolving crises through automated bilateral negotiations. Artificial Intelligence 172, 1 (2008), 1--18. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Kraus, S. and Lehmann, D. Designing and building a negotiating automated agent. Computational Intelligence 11, 1 (1995), 132--171.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Kraus, S., Sycara, K., and Evenchik, A. Reaching agreements through argumentation: a logical model and implementation. Artificial Intelligence 104, 1--2 (1998), 1--68. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Lin, R., Kraus, S., Wilkenfeld, J. and Barry, J. Negotiating with bounded rational agents in environments with incomplete information using an automated agent. Artificial Intelligence 172, 6--7 (2008), 823--851. Google ScholarDigital Library
- McKelvey, R.D. and Palfrey, T.R. An experimental study of the centipede game. Econometrica 60, 4 (1992), 803--836.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Muthoo, A. Bargaining Theory with Applications. Cambridge University Press, MA, 1999. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Online negotiation course; http://www.negotiate.tv/ (2008).Google Scholar
- Oshrat, Y., Lin, R., and Kraus, S. Facing the challenge of human-agent negotiations via effective general opponent modeling. In Proceedings of the 8th International Conference on Autonomous Agents and Multiagent Systems (2009). Google ScholarDigital Library
- Raiffa, H. The Art and Science of Negotiation. Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MA, 1982.Google Scholar
- Rasmusen, E. Games and Information: An Introduction to Game Theory. Blackwell Publishers, 2001.Google Scholar
- Ross, W. and LaCroix, J. Multiple meanings of trust in negotiation theory and research: A literature review and integrative model. International Journal of Conflict Management 7, 4 (1996), 314--360.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Rubinstein, A. Perfect equilibrium in a bargaining model. Econometrica 1 (1982), 97--109.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Rubinstein, A. A bargaining model with incomplete information about preferences. Econometrica 53, 5 (1985), 1151--1172.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Sanfey, A., Rilling, J., Aronson, J., Nystrom, L., and Cohen, J. The neural basis of economic decision-making in the ultimatum game. Science 300 (2003), 1755--1758.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Selten, R. and Stoecker, R. End behavior in sequences of finite prisoner's dilemma supergames: A learning theory approach. Economic Behavior and Organization 7, 1 (1986), 47--70.Google Scholar
- Tennenholtz, M. On stable social laws and qualitative equilibrium for risk-averse agents. In Proceedings of the 5th International Conference on Principles of Knowledge Representation and Reasoning (1996), 553--561.Google Scholar
- Traum, D., Marsella, S., Gratch, J., Lee, J., and Hartholt, A. Multi-party, multi-issue, multi-strategy negotiation for multi-modal virtual agents. In Proceedings of the 8th International Conference on Intelligent Virtual Agents, 2008. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Tversky, A. and Kahneman, D. The framing of decisions and the psychology of choice. Science 211 (1981), 453--458.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Wellman, M.P., Greenwald, A., and Stone, P. Autonomous Bidding Agents: Strategies and Lessons from the Trading Agent Competition. MIT Press, Cambridge, MA, 2007. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Zhang, X., lesser, V., and Podorozhny, R. Multidimensional, multistep negotiation for task allocation in a cooperative system. Autonomous Agents and MultiAgent Systems 10, 1 (2005), 5--40. Google ScholarDigital Library
Index Terms
- Can automated agents proficiently negotiate with humans?
Recommendations
Let's Negotiate with Automation: How can Humans and HMIs Negotiate Disagreement on Automated Vehicles?
AutomotiveUI '22: Adjunct Proceedings of the 14th International Conference on Automotive User Interfaces and Interactive Vehicular ApplicationsIn automated vehicles, the driver and the vehicle make a decision on the driving. However, there is no guarantee that drivers always agree or follow the system's decision. Drivers can reject the system's proposal or regain control, and it reduces the ...
Agents that negotiate proficiently with people
SBP'11: Proceedings of the 4th international conference on Social computing, behavioral-cultural modeling and predictionNegotiation is a process by which interested parties confer with the aim of reaching agreements. The dissemination of technologies such as the Internet has created opportunities for computer agents to negotiate with people, despite being distributed ...
How automated agents treat humans and other automated agents in situations of inequity: an experimental study
AAMAS '08: Proceedings of the 7th international joint conference on Autonomous agents and multiagent systems - Volume 3This paper explores the question of how agent designers perceive and treat their agent's opponents. In particular, it examines the influence of the opponent's identity (human vs. automated agent) in negotiations. We empirically demonstrate that when ...
Comments