Chapter 8 Argumentation and Artifacts for Negotiation Support

Negotiation is a central process in an agent society where autonomous agents have to cooperate in order to resolve conflicting interests and yet compete to divide limited resources. A direct dialogical exchange of information between agents usually leads to competitive forms of negotiation where the most powerful agents win. Alternatively, an intelligent mediated interaction may better achieve the goal of reaching a common agreement and supporting cooperative negotiation. In both cases argumentation is the reference framework to rationally manage conflicting knowledge or objectives, a framework which provides the fundamental abstraction "argument" to exchange pieces of information. In this paper we present a novel conceptual framework for negotiation dialogues using argumentation between autonomous software agents which enables their dialogues to be automated. The framework, called SANA (Supporting Artifacts for Negotiation with Argumentation), incorporates intelligent components able to assist the agent participants to reach agreement by inferring mutually-acceptable proposals. The framework also permits agents to engage in negotiation dialogues with each other, generating and exchanging proposed deals and arguments for and against these proposals. Acceptability of proposals is then assessed in terms of an agreed argumentation framework semantics. We present the architecture of our framework,

[1]  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..

[2]  Peter McBurney,et al.  A Dialogue Game Protocol for Agent Purchase Negotiations , 2003, Autonomous Agents and Multi-Agent Systems.

[3]  Iyad Rahwan,et al.  Adaptive Strategies for Practical Argument-Based Negotiation , 2005 .

[4]  Andrea Omicini,et al.  Artifacts in the A&A meta-model for multi-agent systems , 2008, Autonomous Agents and Multi-Agent Systems.

[5]  N. R. Jennings,et al.  To appear in: Int Journal of Group Decision and Negotiation GDN2000 Keynote Paper Automated Negotiation: Prospects, Methods and Challenges , 2022 .

[6]  Peter McBurney,et al.  Locutions for argumentation in agent interaction protocols , 2004, Proceedings of the Third International Joint Conference on Autonomous Agents and Multiagent Systems, 2004. AAMAS 2004..

[7]  Andrea Omicini,et al.  Agens Faber: Toward a Theory of Artefacts for MAS , 2006, Electron. Notes Theor. Comput. Sci..

[8]  Simon Parsons,et al.  Arguments, Dialogue, and Negotiation , 2000, ECAI.

[9]  Iyad Rahwan,et al.  Argumentation in Multi-Agent Systems , 2011, Lecture Notes in Computer Science.

[10]  Andrea Omicini,et al.  Co-argumentation Artifact for Agent Societies , 2007, ArgMAS.

[11]  Andrea Omicini,et al.  The A&AProgramming Model and Technology for Developing Agent Environments in MAS , 2007, PROMAS.

[12]  Nicholas Carriero,et al.  Coordination languages and their significance , 1992, CACM.

[13]  Peter McBurney,et al.  Retraction and Revocation in Agent Deliberation Dialogs , 2007 .

[14]  Franco Zambonelli,et al.  Coordination for Internet Application Development , 1999, Autonomous Agents and Multi-Agent Systems.

[15]  Olivier Boissier,et al.  A Software Infrastructure for Negotiation within Inter-organisational Alliances , 2002, AMEC.

[16]  Chris Reed,et al.  Argumentation Machines, New Frontiers in Argument and Computation , 2004, Argumentation Machines.

[17]  Ulises Cortés,et al.  Agents Deliberating over Action Proposals Using the ProCLAIM Model , 2007, CEEMAS.

[18]  Iyad Rahwan,et al.  Argumentation in Multi-Agent Systems, Fifth International Workshop, ArgMAS 2008, Estoril, Portugal, May 12, 2008. Revised Selected and Invited Papers , 2009, ArgMAS.

[19]  Nikos I. Karacapilidis,et al.  The Zeno argumentation framework , 1997, ICAIL '97.

[20]  D. Walton,et al.  Commitment in Dialogue: Basic Concepts of Interpersonal Reasoning , 1995 .

[21]  Nicholas R. Jennings,et al.  Dialogue games that agents play within a society , 2009, Artif. Intell..

[22]  Andrea Omicini,et al.  Coordination Artifacts as First-Class Abstractions for MAS Engineering: State of the Research , 2005, SELMAS.

[23]  David Gelernter,et al.  Generative communication in Linda , 1985, TOPL.

[24]  Nishan C. Karunatillake,et al.  Argumentation-based negotiation in a social context , 2006 .

[25]  Iyad Rahwan,et al.  Architectures for Negotiating Agents , 2003, CEEMAS.

[26]  Nicholas R. Jennings,et al.  STRATUM: A METHODOLOGY FOR DESIGNING HEURISTIC AGENT NEGOTIATION STRATEGIES , 2007, Appl. Artif. Intell..

[27]  David Stuart Robertson,et al.  Argument-based applications to knowledge engineering , 2000, The Knowledge Engineering Review.

[28]  Andrea Omicini,et al.  From tuple spaces to tuple centres , 2001, Sci. Comput. Program..

[29]  Nicholas R. Jennings,et al.  Agents That Reason and Negotiate by Arguing , 1998, J. Log. Comput..

[30]  Andrea Omicini,et al.  Formal ReSpecT in the A&A Perspective , 2007, FOCLASA.

[31]  Peter McBurney,et al.  Games That Agents Play: A Formal Framework for Dialogues between Autonomous Agents , 2002, J. Log. Lang. Inf..

[32]  Manel Poch,et al.  Advanced Agent-Based Environmental Management Systems , 2008 .

[33]  Peter McBurney,et al.  Locutions for Argumentation in Agent Interaction Protocols , 2004, AC.

[34]  Peter McBurney,et al.  Dialogue Games for Agent Argumentation , 2009, Argumentation in Artificial Intelligence.

[35]  Sarvapali D. Ramchurn,et al.  Argumentation-based negotiation , 2003, The Knowledge Engineering Review.

[36]  Andrea Omicini,et al.  Coordination artifacts: environment-based coordination for intelligent agents , 2004, Proceedings of the Third International Joint Conference on Autonomous Agents and Multiagent Systems, 2004. AAMAS 2004..

[37]  Pavlos Moraitis,et al.  A General Framework for Argumentation-Based Negotiation , 2007, ArgMAS.

[38]  Nir Oren,et al.  Arguing Using Opponent Models , 2009, ArgMAS.

[39]  Michael Wooldridge,et al.  Information›seeking agent dialogs with permissions and arguments , 2006 .

[40]  Peter McBurney,et al.  A denotational semantics for deliberation dialogues , 2004, Proceedings of the Third International Joint Conference on Autonomous Agents and Multiagent Systems, 2004. AAMAS 2004..

[41]  M. Poch,et al.  Is my spill environmentally safe ? Towards an Integrated Management of Wastewater in a river basin using agents that can argue , 2007 .

[42]  Andrea Omicini,et al.  Argumentation and Artifact for Dialogue Support , 2009, ArgMAS.

[43]  Katia Sycara,et al.  Persuasive argumentation in negotiation , 1990 .

[44]  Gernot Richter,et al.  Discourse Support Systems for Deliberative Democracy , 2002, EGOV.

[45]  Peter McBurney,et al.  Computer decision-support systems for public argumentation: assessing deliberative legitimacy , 2005, AI & SOCIETY.

[46]  Michael Wooldridge,et al.  Law-governed linda as a semantics for agent interaction protocols , 1998 .

[47]  Trevor J. M. Bench-Capon,et al.  Argumentation in artificial intelligence , 2007, Artif. Intell..

[48]  Trevor J. M. Bench-Capon,et al.  COMPUTATIONAL MODELS OF ARGUMENT, PROCEEDINGS OF COMMA 2008 , 2008, COMMA 2008.