The DOI matches its Crossref record.
A framework for argumentation-based negotiation
Open accessAbstract
Many autonomous agents operate in domains in which the cooperation of their fellow agents cannot be guaranteed. In such domains negotiation is essential to persuade others of the value of co-operation. This paper describes a general framework for negotiation in which agents exchange proposals backed by arguments which summarise the reasons why the proposals should be accepted. The argumentation is persuasive because the exchanges are able to alter the mental state of the agents involved. The framework is inspired by our work in the domain of business process management and is explained using examples from that domain.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cited by
Agents that reason and negotiate by arguing
Parsons, S. (1998) · Journal of Logic and Computation · doi:10.1093/logcom/8.3.261 · Cited by 656
Self-citationOn agent-mediated electronic commerce
He, M., Jennings, N. R., & Leung, H.-F. (2003) · IEEE Transactions on Knowledge and Data Engineering · doi:10.1109/tkde.2003.1209014 · Cited by 389
Self-citationReflective artificial intelligence
Lewis, P. R., & Sarkadi, Ş. (2024) · Minds and Machines · doi:10.1007/s11023-024-09664-2 · Cited by 53
Metadata
- Authors
- Sierra, C., Jennings, N. R., Noriega, P., & Parsons, S.
- Venue
- Lecture Notes in Computer Science
- Publisher
- Springer Berlin Heidelberg
- Published
- 1998
- Pages
- 177-192
- ISSN
- 0302-9743 (ISSN-L)
- 1611-3349
- OpenAlex
- W1556421367
- Cited by
- 323
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 9.53
- Type
- conference paper
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.
