Exploring Social Networks in Request for Proposal Dynamic Coalition Formation Problems

In small scale multi-agent environments, every agent is aware of all of the others. This allows agents to evaluate the potential outcomes of their interaction for each of their possible interaction partners. However, this farsighted knowledge becomes an issue in large scale systems, leading to a combinatorial explosion in evaluation and is unrealistic in communication terms. Limited awareness of other agents is therefore the only plausible scenario in many large-scale environments. This limited awareness can be modeled as a sparse social network in which agents only interact with a limited subset of agents known to them. In this paper, we explore a model of dynamic multi-agent coalition formation in which agents are connected via fixed underlying social networks that exhibit different well known structures such as Small World, Randomand Scale Freetopologies. Agents follow different exploratory policies and are distributed in the network according to a variety of metrics. The primary results of the paper are to demonstrate different positive and negative properties of each topology for the coalition formation problem. In particular we show that despite positive properties for many problems, Small Worldtopologies introduce blocking factors which hinder the emergence of good coalition solutions in many configurations.

[1]  Sarit Kraus,et al.  Coalition formation with uncertain heterogeneous information , 2003, AAMAS '03.

[2]  Soundar R. T. Kumara,et al.  Survivability of multiagent-based supply networks: a topological perspect , 2004, IEEE Intelligent Systems.

[3]  Eyal Winter,et al.  Stability and Segregation in Group Formation , 2002, Games Econ. Behav..

[4]  Marie desJardins,et al.  Agent-organized networks for dynamic team formation , 2005, AAMAS '05.

[5]  Ramon Sangüesa,et al.  How Can Social Networks Ever Become Complex? Modelling the Emergence of Complex Networks from Local Social Exchanges , 2005, J. Artif. Soc. Soc. Simul..

[6]  Carlos Mérida-Campos,et al.  The Effect of Heterogeneity on Coalition Formation in Iterated Request for Proposal Scenarios , 2006, EUMAS.

[7]  Christopher Miller,et al.  Guns, Germs, and Steel. The Fate of Human Societies , 2002 .

[8]  J. Diamond Guns, Germs, and Steel: The Fates of Human Societies , 1999 .

[9]  Steven B. Andrews,et al.  Structural Holes: The Social Structure of Competition , 1995, The SAGE Encyclopedia of Research Design.

[10]  Steven Willmott,et al.  Agent Compatibility and Coalition Formation: Investigating Two Interacting Negotiation Strategies , 2006, TADA/AMEC.

[11]  Robert L. Axtell,et al.  Effects of Interaction Topology and Activation Regime in Several Multi-Agent Systems , 2000, MABS.

[12]  Deborah Estrin,et al.  Guest Editors' Introduction: Overview of Sensor Networks , 2004, Computer.

[13]  Duncan J. Watts,et al.  Collective dynamics of ‘small-world’ networks , 1998, Nature.

[14]  Allan Friedman,et al.  The hare and the tortoise: the network structure of exploration and exploitation , 2005, DG.O.

[15]  Albert,et al.  Emergence of scaling in random networks , 1999, Science.

[16]  Victor R. Lesser,et al.  A survey of multi-agent organizational paradigms , 2004, The Knowledge Engineering Review.

[17]  Ramon Sangüesa,et al.  Emergence of coordination in scale-free networks , 2003, Web Intell. Agent Syst..

[18]  Jaime Simão Sichman,et al.  Multi-Agent-Based Simulation , 2002, Lecture Notes in Computer Science.