Browsing by Author "Jonker, C."

Now showing 1 - 4 of 4

Metadata only
Bottom-up approaches to achieve Pareto optimal agreements in group decision making
(Springer Nature, 2019-11) Sanchez-Anguix, V.; Aydoğan, Reyhan; Baarslag, T.; Jonker, C.; Computer Science; AYDOĞAN, Reyhan
In this article, we introduce a new paradigm to achieve Pareto optimality in group decision-making processes: bottom-up approaches to Pareto optimality. It is based on the idea that, while resolving a conflict in a group, individuals may trust some members more than others; thus, they may be willing to cooperate and share more information with those members. Therefore, one can divide the group into subgroups where more cooperative mechanisms can be formed to reach Pareto optimal outcomes. This is the first work that studies such use of a bottom-up approach to achieve Pareto optimality in conflict resolution in groups. First, we prove that an outcome that is Pareto optimal for subgroups is also Pareto optimal for the group as a whole. Then, we empirically analyze the appropriate conditions and achievable performance when applying bottom-up approaches under a wide variety of scenarios based on real-life datasets. The results show that bottom-up approaches are a viable mechanism to achieve Pareto optimality with applications to group decision-making, negotiation teams, and decision making in open environments.
Metadata only
The challenge of negotiation in the game of diplomacy
(Springer Nature, 2019) de Jonge, D.; Baarslag, T.; Aydoğan, Reyhan; Jonker, C.; Fujita, K.; Ito, T.; Computer Science; AYDOĞAN, Reyhan
The game of Diplomacy has been used as a test case for complex automated negotiations for a long time, but to date very few successful negotiation algorithms have been implemented for this game. We have therefore decided to include a Diplomacy tournament within the annual Automated Negotiating Agents Competition (ANAC). In this paper we present the setup and the results of the ANAC 2017 Diplomacy Competition and the ANAC 2018 Diplomacy Challenge. We observe that none of the negotiation algorithms submitted to these two editions have been able to significantly improve the performance over a non-negotiating baseline agent. We analyze these algorithms and discuss why it is so hard to write successful negotiation algorithms for Diplomacy. Finally, we provide experimental evidence that, despite these results, coalition formation and coordination do form essential elements of the game.
Metadata only
The fifth automated negotiating agents competition (ANAC 2014)
(Springer Science+Business Media, 2016) Fujita, K.; Aydoğan, Reyhan; Baarslag, T.; Ito, T.; Jonker, C.; Computer Science; Fukuta, N.; Ito, T.; Zhang, M.; Fujita, K.; Robu, V.; AYDOĞAN, Reyhan
In May 2014, we organized the Fifth International Automated Negotiating Agents Competition (ANAC 2014) in conjunction with AAMAS 2014. ANAC is an international competition that challenges researchers to develop a successful automated negotiator for scenarios where there is incomplete information about the opponent. One of the goals of this competition is to help steer the research in the area of bilateral multi-issue negotiations, and to encourage the design of generic negotiating agents that are able to operate in a variety of scenarios. 21 teams from 13 different institutes competed in ANAC 2014. This chapter describes the participating agents and the setup of the tournament, including the different negotiation scenarios that were used in the competition. We report on the results of the qualifying and final round of the tournament.
Metadata only
The sixth automated negotiating agents competition (ANAC 2015)
(Springer Nature, 2017) Fujita, K.; Aydoğan, Reyhan; Baarslag, T.; Hindriks, K.; Ito, T.; Jonker, C.; Computer Science; AYDOĞAN, Reyhan
In May 2015, we organized the Sixth International Automated Negotiating Agents Competition (ANAC 2015) in conjunction with AAMAS 2015. ANAC is an international competition that challenges researchers to develop a successful automated negotiator for scenarios where there is incomplete information about the opponent. One of the goals of this competition is to help steer the research in the area of multi-issue negotiations, and to encourage the design of generic negotiating agents that are able to operate in a variety of scenarios. 24 teams from 9 different institutes competed in ANAC 2015. This chapter describes the participating agents and the setup of the tournament, including the different negotiation scenarios that were used in the competition. We report on the results of the qualifying and final round of the tournament.