Negotiation algorithms for collaborative design settings

Mark Klein, Peyman Faratin, Hiroki Sayama, Yaneer Bar-Yam

Research output: Chapter in Book/Report/Conference proceedingChapter

Abstract

Work to date on computational models of negotiation has focused almost exclusively on defining 'simple' agreements consisting of one or a few independent issues [1] [2]. These protocols work via the iterative exchange of proposals and counter-proposals. An agent starts with proposal that is optimal for it and makes concessions, in each subsequent proposal, until either an agreement is reached or the negotiation is abandoned because the utility of the latest proposal has fallen below the agents' reservation (minimal acceptable utility) value (Figure 1):

Original languageEnglish
Title of host publicationComplex Engineered Systems
Subtitle of host publicationScience Meets Technology
Pages246-261
Number of pages16
Volume2006
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 2006
Externally publishedYes

Publication series

NameUnderstanding Complex Systems
Volume2006
ISSN (Print)1860-0832
ISSN (Electronic)1860-0840

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Software
  • Computational Mechanics
  • Artificial Intelligence

Cite this

Klein, M., Faratin, P., Sayama, H., & Bar-Yam, Y. (2006). Negotiation algorithms for collaborative design settings. In Complex Engineered Systems: Science Meets Technology (Vol. 2006, pp. 246-261). (Understanding Complex Systems; Vol. 2006). https://doi.org/10.1007/3-540-32834-3_11

Negotiation algorithms for collaborative design settings. / Klein, Mark; Faratin, Peyman; Sayama, Hiroki; Bar-Yam, Yaneer.

Complex Engineered Systems: Science Meets Technology. Vol. 2006 2006. p. 246-261 (Understanding Complex Systems; Vol. 2006).

Research output: Chapter in Book/Report/Conference proceedingChapter

Klein, M, Faratin, P, Sayama, H & Bar-Yam, Y 2006, Negotiation algorithms for collaborative design settings. in Complex Engineered Systems: Science Meets Technology. vol. 2006, Understanding Complex Systems, vol. 2006, pp. 246-261. https://doi.org/10.1007/3-540-32834-3_11
Klein M, Faratin P, Sayama H, Bar-Yam Y. Negotiation algorithms for collaborative design settings. In Complex Engineered Systems: Science Meets Technology. Vol. 2006. 2006. p. 246-261. (Understanding Complex Systems). https://doi.org/10.1007/3-540-32834-3_11
Klein, Mark ; Faratin, Peyman ; Sayama, Hiroki ; Bar-Yam, Yaneer. / Negotiation algorithms for collaborative design settings. Complex Engineered Systems: Science Meets Technology. Vol. 2006 2006. pp. 246-261 (Understanding Complex Systems).
@inbook{e68a7ce39ff14edf8b525f6be2c666f6,
title = "Negotiation algorithms for collaborative design settings",
abstract = "Work to date on computational models of negotiation has focused almost exclusively on defining 'simple' agreements consisting of one or a few independent issues [1] [2]. These protocols work via the iterative exchange of proposals and counter-proposals. An agent starts with proposal that is optimal for it and makes concessions, in each subsequent proposal, until either an agreement is reached or the negotiation is abandoned because the utility of the latest proposal has fallen below the agents' reservation (minimal acceptable utility) value (Figure 1):",
author = "Mark Klein and Peyman Faratin and Hiroki Sayama and Yaneer Bar-Yam",
year = "2006",
doi = "10.1007/3-540-32834-3_11",
language = "English",
isbn = "9783540328315",
volume = "2006",
series = "Understanding Complex Systems",
pages = "246--261",
booktitle = "Complex Engineered Systems",

}

TY - CHAP

T1 - Negotiation algorithms for collaborative design settings

AU - Klein, Mark

AU - Faratin, Peyman

AU - Sayama, Hiroki

AU - Bar-Yam, Yaneer

PY - 2006

Y1 - 2006

N2 - Work to date on computational models of negotiation has focused almost exclusively on defining 'simple' agreements consisting of one or a few independent issues [1] [2]. These protocols work via the iterative exchange of proposals and counter-proposals. An agent starts with proposal that is optimal for it and makes concessions, in each subsequent proposal, until either an agreement is reached or the negotiation is abandoned because the utility of the latest proposal has fallen below the agents' reservation (minimal acceptable utility) value (Figure 1):

AB - Work to date on computational models of negotiation has focused almost exclusively on defining 'simple' agreements consisting of one or a few independent issues [1] [2]. These protocols work via the iterative exchange of proposals and counter-proposals. An agent starts with proposal that is optimal for it and makes concessions, in each subsequent proposal, until either an agreement is reached or the negotiation is abandoned because the utility of the latest proposal has fallen below the agents' reservation (minimal acceptable utility) value (Figure 1):

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=70349417939&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=70349417939&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1007/3-540-32834-3_11

DO - 10.1007/3-540-32834-3_11

M3 - Chapter

SN - 9783540328315

VL - 2006

T3 - Understanding Complex Systems

SP - 246

EP - 261

BT - Complex Engineered Systems

ER -