R2-IBN: Argumentation Based Negotiation Framework for the Extended Enterprise

Hsairi, Lobna; Ghédira, Khaled; Alimi, Adel M.; Benabdelhafid, Abdellatif

doi:10.1007/978-3-540-87656-4_66

Cited by 3 publications

(2 citation statements)

References 12 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Although it is not a technique that is widely used in supply chain, some researchers have investigated this approach. For instance, Hsairi et al (2008) introduce an argument-based negotiation approach for conflict resolution for the extended enterprise. Along the same line, Chow et al (2008) proposes an argument-based technique in the context of a logistic service provider to dynamically solve conflicts in International Journal of Computer Integrated Manufacturing 949 operations management.…”

Section: Behaviour-based Planningmentioning

confidence: 99%

Mutual adjustment search with incentive for supply chain planning coordination

Taghipour

Frayret

2012

International Journal of Computer Integrated Manufacturing

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Supply chains are complex systems, which include several independent organisations with different objectives. A key issue in supply chain management is the coordination of supply chain planning decisions. Supply chain planning systems introduced in the literature can be classified into two main planning systems: centralised and decentralised planning systems. Centralised systems can theoretically optimise supply chain performance, although its implementation requires a high degree of information exchange among supply chain partners. This leads to difficulties when independent partners do not want to share information. In order to address these difficulties, decentralised systems are designed for supply chains where each member is a separate economic entity that makes its operational decisions independently, yet with some minimal level of information sharing. In this paper, we propose a decentralised coordination mechanism based on a negotiation-like mutual adjustment of planning decisions, rooted in mathematical programming. This mechanism, unlike traditional centralised system, involves two enterprises, which interact with each other in order to improve their individual and collective performance. Computational analysis shows that the proposed negotiation-like coordination mechanism leads to near-optimal results when compared to central coordination, while maintaining fairness in terms of revenue sharing.

show abstract

Section: Behaviour-based Planningmentioning

confidence: 99%

Mutual adjustment search with incentive for supply chain planning coordination

Taghipour

Frayret

2012

International Journal of Computer Integrated Manufacturing

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…This proposal aims to apply several principles among the model agents (communication, coordination, negotiation, and cooperation), whose objective is building efficient segmentation. Adopting cooperation between segmentation techniques improves the quality and reliability of analyzes and possible decisions [12].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

A robust multi-agent Negotiation for advanced Image Segmentation: Design and Implementation

Allioui

Sadgal

Fazziki

2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

It is generally accepted that segmentation is a critical problem that influences subsequent tasks during image processing. Often, the proposed approaches provide effectiveness for a limited type of images with a significant lack of a global solution. The difficulty of segmentation lies in the complexity of providing a global solution with acceptable accuracy within a reasonable time. To overcome this problem, some solutions combined several methods. This paper presents a method for segmenting 2D/3D images by merging regions and solving problems encountered during the process using a multi-agent system (MAS). We are using the strengths of MAS by opting for a compromise that satisfies segmentation by agents’ acts. Regions with high similarity are merged immediately, while the others with low similarity are ignored. The remaining ones, with ambiguous similarity, are solved in a coalition by negotiation. In our system, the agents make decisions according to the utility functions adopting the Pareto optimal in Game theory. Unlike hierarchical merging methods, MAS performs a hypothetical merger planning then negotiates the agreements' subsets to merge all regions at once.

show abstract