Personalizing communication about trust

Agents in open multi-agent systems must deal with the difficult problem of selecting interaction partners in the face of uncertainty about their behaviour. This is especially problematic if they have to interact with an agent they have not interacted with before. In this case they can turn to their peers for information about this potential partner. However, in scenarios where agents may be evaluated according to many different criteria for many different purposes, their peers' evaluations may be mismatched with regards to their own expectations. In this paper we present a novel method, using an argumentation framework, that allows agents to discuss and adapt their trust model. This allows agents to provide, and receive, personalized trust evaluations, better suited to the agent in need, as is shown in a prototypical experiment.

[1]  Guillermo Ricardo Simari,et al.  Modelling Inference in Argumentation through Labelled Deduction: Formalization and Logical Properties , 2007, Logica Universalis.

[2]  Henri Prade,et al.  Using arguments for making and explaining decisions , 2009, Artif. Intell..

[3]  Michael Wooldridge,et al.  An abstract framework for reasoning about trust , 2011, AAMAS.

[4]  Elizabeth Sklar,et al.  Argumentation-based reasoning in agents with varying degrees of trust , 2011, AAMAS.

[5]  Jordi Sabater-Mir,et al.  Inductively generated trust alignments based on shared interactions , 2010, AAMAS.

[6]  Jordi Sabater-Mir,et al.  Opening the black box of trust: reasoning about trust models in a BDI agent , 2013, J. Log. Comput..

[7]  Anand S. Rao,et al.  Modeling Rational Agents within a BDI-Architecture , 1997, KR.

[8]  Isaac Piñol Catadau.  Milking the reputation cow: argumentation, reasoning and cofnitive agents , 2010 .

[9]  Nicholas R. Jennings,et al.  TRAVOS: Trust and Reputation in the Context of Inaccurate Information Sources , 2006, Autonomous Agents and Multi-Agent Systems.

[10]  Jordi Sabater-Mir,et al.  Towards the Definition of an Argumentation Framework using Reputation Information , 2009 .

[11]  Michael Wooldridge,et al.  An abstract framework for reasoning about trust (Extended Abstract) , 2011 .

[12]  Neil D. Jones,et al.  Computability and complexity - from a programming perspective , 1997, Foundations of computing series.

[13]  Michael Wooldridge,et al.  Programming Multi-Agent Systems in AgentSpeak using Jason (Wiley Series in Agent Technology) , 2007 .

[14]  Henry Prakken,et al.  Models of Persuasion Dialogue , 2009, Argumentation in Artificial Intelligence.

[15]  Stephen Cranefield,et al.  A social-network defence against whitewashing , 2010, AAMAS.

[16]  Jordi Sabater-Mir,et al.  Repage: REPutation and ImAGE Among Limited Autonomous Partners , 2006, J. Artif. Soc. Soc. Simul..

[17]  Trevor J. M. Bench-Capon.  Persuasion in Practical Argument Using Value-based Argumentation Frameworks , 2003, J. Log. Comput..

[18]  Jordi Sabater-Mir,et al.  An Argumentation-Based Dialog for Social Evaluations Exchange , 2010, ECAI.

[19]  Paul Resnick,et al.  Trust among strangers in internet transactions: Empirical analysis of eBay' s reputation system , 2002, The Economics of the Internet and E-commerce.

[20]  Phan Minh Dung,et al.  On the Acceptability of Arguments and its Fundamental Role in Nonmonotonic Reasoning, Logic Programming and n-Person Games , 1995, Artif. Intell..