A comparative study of argumentation- and proposal-based negotiation

Angelika Först, Achim Rettinger, Matthias Nickles

Research output: Chapter in Book or Conference Publication/ProceedingChapterpeer-review

Abstract

Recently, argumentation-based negotiation has been proposed as an alternative to classical mechanism design. The main advantage of argumentation-based negotiation is that it allows agents to exchange complex justification positions rather than just simple proposals. Its proponents maintain that this property of argumentation protocols can lead to faster and beneficial agreements when used for complex multiagent negotiation. In this paper, we present an empirical comparison of argumentation-based negotiation to proposal-based negotiation in a strategic two-player scenario, using a game-theoretic solution as a benchmark, which requires full knowledge of the stage games. Our experiments show that in fact the argumentation-based approach outperforms the proposal-based approach with respect to the quality of the agreements found and the overall time to agreement.

Original languageEnglish
Title of host publicationAdvances in Agent-Based Complex Automated Negotiations
EditorsTakayuki Ito, Minjie Zhang, Valentin Robu, Shaheen Fatima, Tokuro Matsuo
Pages39-59
Number of pages21
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 2009
Externally publishedYes

Publication series

NameStudies in Computational Intelligence
Volume233
ISSN (Print)1860-949X

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'A comparative study of argumentation- and proposal-based negotiation'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this