Norm negotiation in online multi-player games

Boella, Guido; Caire, Patrice; Torre, Leendert van der

doi:10.1007/s10115-008-0162-2

Cited by 8 publications

(4 citation statements)

References 40 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Thus, satisfying their (imputed) goals is healthier than giving them what they expressly arouse. Prior negotiation protocols for settings associated with STSs, e.g., [8,10], accommodate neither values nor the whole breadth of associate degree STS as conceived here. Existing approaches, e.g., concentrate on eliminating conflicts among negotiating parties.…”

Section: Elicitation Of Ethical Systemsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Advanced Key Foundations of Multiagent System

Purushotham¹

2023

IJRASET

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Ethics is inherently a multiagent concern. However, analysis on AI ethics nowadays is dominated by work on individual agents: (1) however Associate in Nursing autonomous golem or automotive could hurt or (differentially) profit folks in theoretical things (the questionable tramcar problems) and (2) how a machine learning formula could turn out biased choices or recommendations. The social group framework is basically omitted. To develop new foundations for ethics in AI, we tend to adopt a sociotechnical stance during which agents (as technical entities) facilitate autonomous social entities or principals (people and organizations). This multiagent conception of a sociotechnical system (STS) captures however moral considerations arise within the mutual interactions of multiple stakeholders. These foundations would modify USA to understand ethical STSs that incorporate social and technical controls to respect stated moral postures of the agents within the STSs. The visualized foundations need new thinking, on 2 broad themes, on how to realize (1) Associate in STS that reflects its stakeholders’ values and (2) individual agents that perform effectively in such Associate in STS.

show abstract

Section: Elicitation Of Ethical Systemsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Advanced Key Foundations of Multiagent System

Purushotham¹

2023

IJRASET

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Two, centralized conflict resolution approaches Günay and Yolum 2013;Kollingbaum et al 2006] can eliminate clearcut contradictions but lack reasoning about tradeoffs from a decentralized perspective where all agents are equally represented. Three, norm negotiation [Boella et al 2009;Dijkstra et al 2007] seeks to achieve social goals and resolve conflicts but omits preferences or bidding strategies. In general, to accommodate all agents' preferences and the potential tradeoffs among them, we need an automated approach to support specifying an nMAS by reasoning about norms and enabling agents to make concessions by revising one or more of the norms.…”

Section: Problem In Briefmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Rahwan et al [2003] propose an interest-based negotiation approach where an agent evaluates an offer based on its impact on satisfying the agent's goal. Boella et al [2009] propose a protocol for negotiating norms and sanctions with respect to agents' goals in social settings, e.g., online multiplayer games. To deal with the underlying concerns of the negotiating parties, we adopt a value-based approach rather than reasoning about agents' goals.…”

Section: Human-subject Studymentioning

confidence: 99%

Nova : Value-based Negotiation of Norms

Aydoğan

Kafalı

Arslan

et al. 2021

ACM Trans. Intell. Syst. Technol.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Specifying a normative multiagent system (nMAS) is challenging, because different agents often have conflicting requirements. Whereas existing approaches can resolve clear-cut conflicts, tradeoffs might occur in practice among alternative nMAS specifications with no apparent resolution. To produce an nMAS specification that is acceptable to each agent, we model the specification process as a negotiation over a set of norms. We propose an agent-based negotiation framework, where agents’ requirements are represented as values (e.g., patient safety, privacy, and national security), and an agent revises the nMAS specification to promote its values by executing a set of norm revision rules that incorporate ontology-based reasoning. To demonstrate that our framework supports creating a transparent and accountable nMAS specification, we conduct an experiment with human participants who negotiate against our agent. Our findings show that our negotiation agent reaches better agreements (with small p -value and large effect size) faster than a baseline strategy. Moreover, participants perceive that our agent enables more collaborative and transparent negotiations than the baseline (with small p -value and large effect size in particular settings) toward reaching an agreement.

show abstract

“…Congratulations RZ!!! [17] Normative multiagent systems study multiagent technology to support the emergent cooperation in online multi-player games like EverQuest [2]. The example illustrates that the game had been so well wrought that a real coalition of communities of players had formed, one that was able to set aside the differences between the communities, at least for a night, in pursuit of a common goal.…”

Section: Examples Of An Interactionist Viewmentioning

confidence: 99%

Introduction to the special issue on normative multiagent systems

Boella

Torre

Verhagen

2008

Auton Agent Multi-Agent Syst

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This special issue contains four selected and revised papers from the second international workshop on normative multiagent systems, for short NorMAS07 (Boella et al. In this editorial we discuss the shift, examples, and 10 new challenges in this more dynamic setting, which we use to introduce the papers of this special issue.Keywords Norms · Multiagent Systems · Normative multiagent systems · Social mechanism design · Artifical social systems Towards a more dynamic interactionist viewTraditionally normative systems have been studied in philosophy, sociology, law, and ethics, and during the past two decades they have been studied in deontic logic in computer science ( EON). Normative multiagent systems is a research area where the traditional normative systems and EON research fields meet agent research. The proposed solutions to the EON research problems are changing, and solutions based on multiagent systems are increasing. Gradually the EON research focus changes from logical relations among norms, to, for

show abstract

Norm negotiation in online multi-player games

Cited by 8 publications

References 40 publications

Advanced Key Foundations of Multiagent System

Advanced Key Foundations of Multiagent System

Nova : Value-based Negotiation of Norms

Introduction to the special issue on normative multiagent systems

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About