Nova: Value-based Negotiation of Norms

Specifying a normative multiagent system (nMAS) is challenging, because different agents often have conflicting requirements. Whereas existing approaches can resolve clear-cut conflicts, tradeoffs might occur in practice among alternative nMAS specifications with no apparent resolution. To produce an nMAS specification that is acceptable to each agent, we model the specification process as a negotiation over a set of norms. We propose an agent-based negotiation framework, where agents’ requirements are represented as values (e.g., patient safety, privacy, and national security), and an agent revises the nMAS specification to promote its values by executing a set of norm revision rules that incorporate ontology-based reasoning. To demonstrate that our framework supports creating a transparent and accountable nMAS specification, we conduct an experiment with human participants who negotiate against our agent. Our findings show that our negotiation agent reaches better agreements (with small p-value and large effect size) faster than a baseline strategy. Moreover, participants perceive that our agent enables more collaborative and transparent negotiations than the baseline (with small p-value and large effect size in particular settings) toward reaching an agreement.

[1]  Pinar Yolum,et al.  Computational logics and verification techniques of multi-agent commitments: survey , 2015, The Knowledge Engineering Review.

[2]  Munindar P. Singh,et al.  Revani: Revising and Verifying Normative Specifications for Privacy , 2016, IEEE Intelligent Systems.

[3]  Christian Straßer,et al.  Non-monotonic reasoning with normative conflicts in multi-agent deontic logic , 2014, J. Log. Comput..

[4]  Munindar P. Singh,et al.  DESEN , 2019, ACM Trans. Softw. Eng. Methodol..

[5]  Pinar Yolum,et al.  Constraint satisfaction as a tool for modeling and checking feasibility of multiagent commitments , 2013, Applied Intelligence.

[6]  Gauthier Picard,et al.  Multi-agent Self-Organization and Reorganization to Adapt M2M Infrastructures , 2015, 2015 IEEE 9th International Conference on Self-Adaptive and Self-Organizing Systems.

[7]  Munindar P. Singh Norms as a basis for governing sociotechnical systems , 2013, IJCAI.

[8]  Koen V. Hindriks,et al.  Automated Negotiating Agents Competition (ANAC) , 2017, AAAI.

[9]  Natalia Criado,et al.  MaNEA: A distributed architecture for enforcing norms in open MAS , 2013, Eng. Appl. Artif. Intell..

[10]  Monica M. C. Schraefel,et al.  Optimal Negotiation Decision Functions in Time-Sensitive Domains , 2015, 2015 IEEE/WIC/ACM International Conference on Web Intelligence and Intelligent Agent Technology (WI-IAT).

[11]  Carola Eschenbach,et al.  Formal Ontology in Information Systems , 2008 .

[12]  Viviane Torres da Silva,et al.  Detection and resolution of normative conflicts in multi-agent systems: a literature survey , 2018, Autonomous Agents and Multi-Agent Systems.

[13]  Mehdi Dastani,et al.  Reasoning about Normative Update , 2013, IJCAI.

[14]  N. Palladino,et al.  The role of the epistemic communities in the 'constitutionalization' of the Internet Governance: the case of the EU High-Level Expert Group on Artificial Intelligence. , 2020 .

[15]  John Mylopoulos,et al.  Protos: Foundations for engineering innovative sociotechnical systems , 2014, 2014 IEEE 22nd International Requirements Engineering Conference (RE).

[16]  Mark Klein,et al.  ADDRESSING UTILITY SPACE COMPLEXITY IN NEGOTIATIONS INVOLVING HIGHLY UNCORRELATED, CONSTRAINT‐BASED UTILITY SPACES , 2014, Comput. Intell..

[17]  Michael Hack The implications of Apple's battle with the FBI , 2016, Netw. Secur..

[18]  Munindar P. Singh,et al.  Kont: Computing Tradeoffs in Normative Multiagent Systems , 2017, AAAI.

[19]  Pinar Yolum,et al.  Learning opponent’s preferences for effective negotiation: an approach based on concept learning , 2010, Autonomous Agents and Multi-Agent Systems.

[20]  Guido Governatori Business Process Compliance: An Abstract Normative Framework , 2013, it Inf. Technol..

[21]  Yang Gao,et al.  A probabilistic argumentation framework for reinforcement learning agents , 2019, Autonomous Agents and Multi-Agent Systems.

[22]  Henry Prakken,et al.  An implementation of norm-based agent negotiation , 2007, ICAIL.

[23]  Aspassia Daskalopulu,et al.  Normative conflicts in electronic contracts , 2011, Electron. Commer. Res. Appl..

[24]  R. M. Hare,et al.  Norm and Action: A Logical Enquiry. , 1965 .

[25]  A. Rubinstein The Electronic Mail Game: Strategic Behavior Under "Almost Common Knowledge" , 1989 .

[26]  Koen V. Hindriks,et al.  Alternating Offers Protocols for Multilateral Negotiation , 2017 .

[27]  Koen V. Hindriks,et al.  Learning about the opponent in automated bilateral negotiation: a comprehensive survey of opponent modeling techniques , 2016, Autonomous Agents and Multi-Agent Systems.

[28]  Jaime Simão Sichman,et al.  Classifying sanctions and designing a conceptual sanctioning process model for socio-technical systems , 2016, The Knowledge Engineering Review.

[29]  Nicholas R. Jennings,et al.  IAMhaggler2011: A Gaussian Process Regression Based Negotiation Agent , 2013, Complex Automated Negotiations.

[30]  M. Cannarsa Ethics Guidelines for Trustworthy AI , 2021, The Cambridge Handbook of Lawyering in the Digital Age.

[31]  Marina De Vos,et al.  Norm emergence in multiagent systems: a viewpoint paper , 2019, Autonomous Agents and Multi-Agent Systems.

[32]  P. Carnevale,et al.  Social values and social conflict in creative problem solving and categorization. , 1998 .

[33]  A. Marty Getting to YES. Negotiating Agreement Without Giving In , 1983 .

[34]  Guido Boella,et al.  Under Consideration for Publication in Knowledge and Information Systems Norm Negotiation in Online Multi-player Games , 2022 .

[35]  Georg Henrik Deontic Logic: A Personal View , 1999 .

[36]  Philip H. Ramsey Nonparametric Statistical Methods , 1974, Technometrics.

[37]  Bo Yu,et al.  Human-Agent Negotiations: The Impact Agents' Concession Schedule and Task Complexity on Agreements , 2017, HICSS.

[38]  Michael Luck,et al.  Argumentation Based Resolution of Conflicts between Desires and Normative Goals , 2009, ArgMAS.

[39]  Wamberto Weber Vasconcelos,et al.  Group Norms for Multi-Agent Organisations , 2016, ACM Trans. Auton. Adapt. Syst..

[40]  Koen V. Hindriks,et al.  Opponent modelling in automated multi-issue negotiation using Bayesian learning , 2008, AAMAS.

[41]  Edmund H. Durfee,et al.  Commitment Semantics for Sequential Decision Making under Reward Uncertainty , 2016, IJCAI.

[42]  P. Pasquier,et al.  Reasoning about Goal Revelation in Human Negotiation , 2013, IEEE Intelligent Systems.

[43]  R. Grissom,et al.  Effect Sizes for Research : Univariate and Multivariate Applications, Second Edition , 2005 .

[44]  Takayuki Ito,et al.  The Challenge of Negotiation in the Game of Diplomacy , 2018, AT.

[45]  Nadim Obeid,et al.  On formalizing social commitments in dialogue and argumentation models using temporal defeasible logic , 2012, Knowledge and Information Systems.

[46]  W VasconcelosWamberto,et al.  Normative conflict resolution in multi-agent systems , 2009 .

[47]  Pinar Yolum,et al.  Learning consumer preferences using semantic similarity , 2007, AAMAS '07.

[48]  W. F. V. Raaij,et al.  Domain‐specific Market Segmentation , 1994 .

[49]  Wamberto Weber Vasconcelos,et al.  Normative conflict resolution in multi-agent systems , 2009, Autonomous Agents and Multi-Agent Systems.

[50]  Pinar Yolum,et al.  Reasoning and Negotiating with Complex Preferences Using CP-Nets , 2008, AMEC/TADA.

[51]  Frank Dignum,et al.  Towards interest-based negotiation , 2003, AAMAS '03.

[52]  Serena Villata,et al.  An ASPIC-based legal argumentation framework for deontic reasoning , 2014, COMMA.

[53]  Michael Kaisers,et al.  The Value of Information in Automated Negotiation: A Decision Model for Eliciting User Preferences , 2017, AAMAS.

[54]  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..

[55]  Koen V. Hindriks,et al.  Heuristics for using CP-nets in utility-based negotiation without knowing utilities , 2014, Knowledge and Information Systems.

[56]  Pinar Yolum,et al.  PISAGOR: a proactive software agent for monitoring interactions , 2016, Knowledge and Information Systems.

[57]  Paolo Torroni,et al.  Exception diagnosis in multiagent contract executions , 2012, Annals of Mathematics and Artificial Intelligence.

[58]  Rada Chirkova,et al.  Coco: Runtime Reasoning about Conflicting Commitments , 2016, IJCAI.

[59]  Srdjan Marinovic,et al.  Rumpole: An Introspective Break-Glass Access Control Language , 2014, TSEC.

[60]  N. Isaacs,et al.  Fundamental Legal Conceptions as Applied in Judicial Reasoning: And Other Legal Essays , 2010 .

[61]  Ronen I. Brafman,et al.  CP-nets: A Tool for Representing and Reasoning withConditional Ceteris Paribus Preference Statements , 2011, J. Artif. Intell. Res..

[62]  Munindar P. Singh,et al.  DESEN , 2019 .

[63]  Catholijn M. Jonker,et al.  A Framework for Institutions Governing Institutions , 2015, AAMAS.

[64]  Nicholas R. Jennings,et al.  Negotiation decision functions for autonomous agents , 1998, Robotics Auton. Syst..

[65]  Alun Preece,et al.  Norm Refinement: Informing the Re-negotiation of Contracts , 2006 .

[66]  J. Horty Agency and Deontic Logic , 2001 .

[67]  Leon van der Torre,et al.  A Deontic Logic Reasoning Infrastructure , 2018, CiE.

[68]  Catholijn M. Jonker,et al.  When Will Negotiation Agents Be Able to Represent Us? The Challenges and Opportunities for Autonomous Negotiators , 2017, IJCAI.

[69]  Paola Mello,et al.  Representing and monitoring social commitments using the event calculus , 2013, Autonomous Agents and Multi-Agent Systems.

[70]  Víctor Sánchez-Anguix,et al.  Rethinking Frequency Opponent Modeling in Automated Negotiation , 2017, PRIMA.