On cooperation in multi-agent systems

Abstract

Cooperation is often presented as one of the key concepts which differentiates multi-agent systems from other related disciplines such as distributed computing, object-oriented systems, and expert systems. However it is a concept whose precise usage in agent-based systems is at best unclear and at worst highly inconsistent. Given the centrality of the issue, and the different ideological viewpoints on the subject, this was a lively panel which dealt with the following main issues: 3) What sorts of cooperation are you likely to see in real multi-agent systems? How does the degree of autonomy, self interest, benevolence, affect cooperation strategies? What are implications of cooperation? Is it always beneficial, or are there costs associated with it that lead to adverse effects? 4) Must cooperation be motivated a priori or can it emerge or evolve through complex social relationships? Is it meaningful to talk about reactive cooperation and if so, how? 5) Is cooperation a mentalistic or a behavioural notion? Can cooperation be described solely by examining the mental state of the participants (e.g. their beliefs, desires, etc.) or can it only be described by examining their actions (i.e. irrespective of their internal state) or does it require a mixture of the two? 6) What are the key mechanisms and structures which give rise to cooperation and allow it to be sustained? To what extent are these mechanisms and structures necessary? Is it possible to identify a necessary set of conditions for cooperation?The range of answers to these questions were many and varied, however the main cause of such variety was the difference in starting points (see questions 1 and 2)-Franklin offered a broad and all encompassing definition, Norman offered a precise and constrained definition, and Doran was somewhere between the two. The other main points of discussion related to questions 4 and 5.So starting with Franklin. He offers a typology of cooperation b (see figure 1)-placing it in the a. This report is the result of a panel discussion at the First UK Workshop on Foundations of Multi-Agent Systems (held at the University of Warwick on Oct. 23rd 1996). The three panellists and the chairman are the authors of this document and they are listed in alphabetical order.

A Negotiation-Based Coalition Formation Model for Agents with Incomplete Information and Time Constraints

“…Interested readers are referred to (Soh and Tsatsoulis 2001) for a detailed presentation of the logical protocol. Some important work in negotiation can be found in (Durfee and Lesser 1991;Lâasri et al 1992;Kraus et al 1995;Zlotkin and Rosenschein 1996;Doran et al 1997;Kraus 1997;Faratin et al 1998;Kraus et al 1998;Parsons et al 1998). …”

Emergence of multiagent spatial coordination strategies through artificial coevolution

“…Many approaches to tackle coordination problems are currently available in the literature [1,3,7]. Most of them center around the specification and implementation of high-level protocols (many times based on human social interactions) containing the actions to be taken at particular cases, either by a single agent or by the whole group.…”

“…Evolutionary Computation (EC) has come out as the branch of computational intelligence research employing metaphors from natural evolutionary phenomena as a means to achieve efficient problem solving (search) techniques [3]. Its applicability has constantly increased in recent years, and many are the engineering fields that have some of their processes improved through the appliance of evolutionary-based approaches.…”

“…In such context, a set of players must work together in order to put the ball into the opposing goal (augmenting its score) while at the same time defending its own. This is a typical domain where cooperation [3] should take part inFthe individuals have the same global objective. One important issue for a soccer team to win a game is the strategy it uses, during a game period, to place each of its components in a given region of the field (such as backfield, leftwing, attack etc).…”

The Distributed Weighing Problem: A Lesson in Cooperation Without Communication

“…However, in a number of cases of cooperation between agents, no communication takes place (see also [7]). For instance, without communication people often coordinate their actions so that they do not bump in to each other on the street.…”