The DOI matches its Crossref record; 28 of the 28 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Agents that reason and negotiate by arguing
Abstract
The need for negotiation in multi-agent systems stems from the requirement for agents to solve the problems posed by their interdependence upon one another. Negotiation provides a solution to these problems by giving the agents the means to resolve their conflicting objectives, correct inconsistencies in their knowledge of other agents' world views, and coordinate a joint approach to domain tasks which benefits all the agents concerned. We propose a framework, based upon a system of argumentation, which permits agents to negotiate in order to establish acceptable ways of solving problems. The framework provides a formal model of argumentation-based reasoning and negotiation, details a design philosophy which ensures a clear link between the formal model and its practical instantiation, and describes a case study of this relationship for a particular class of architectures (namely those for belief-desire-intention agents).
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
Cites
Intelligent agents: theory and practice
Wooldridge, M., & Jennings, N. R. (1995) · The Knowledge Engineering Review · doi:10.1017/s0269888900008122 · Cited by 6,810
Dung, P. M. (1995) · Artificial Intelligence · doi:10.1016/0004-3702(94)00041-x · Cited by 4,270
EMERSON, E. A. (1990) · Formal Models and Semantics · doi:10.1016/b978-0-444-88074-1.50021-4 · Cited by 2,585
BDI Agents: From Theory to Practice
Rao, A. S., & Georgeff, M. (1995) · Cited by 2,577
Agents that reduce work and information overload
Maes, P. (1994) · Communications of the ACM · doi:10.1145/176789.176792 · Cited by 2,321
Shoham, Y. (1993) · Artificial Intelligence · doi:10.1016/0004-3702(93)90034-9 · Cited by 2,041
Intention is choice with commitment
Cohen, P. R., & Levesque, H. J. (1990) · Artificial Intelligence · doi:10.1016/0004-3702(90)90055-5 · Cited by 1,860
An Introduction to Modal Logic
Cresswell, M. J., & HUGHES, G. E. (1968) · Cited by 1,834
Chellas, B. F. (1980) · Cited by 1,806
Modeling rational agents with a BDI-architecture
Rao, A. S., & Georgeff, M. (1997) · Principles of Knowledge Representation and Reasoning · Cited by 1,596
Cited by
Walton, D., Reed, C., & Macagno, F. (2008) · Cambridge University Press eBooks · doi:10.1017/cbo9780511802034 · Cited by 1,372
Argumentation in artificial intelligence
Bench-Capon, T. J. M., & Dunne, P. E. (2007) · Artificial Intelligence · doi:10.1016/j.artint.2007.05.001 · Cited by 803
Luo, X., Jennings, N. R., Shadbolt, N., Leung, H.-F., & Lee, J. H.-M. (2003) · Artificial Intelligence · doi:10.1016/s0004-3702(03)00041-9 · Cited by 316
Metadata
- Authors
- Parsons, S.
- Venue
- Journal of Logic and Computation
- Publisher
- Oxford University Press (OUP)
- Published
- 1998-06-01
- Volume
- 8
- Issue
- 3
- Pages
- 261-292
- ISSN
- 0955-792X (ISSN-L)
- 1465-363X
- OpenAlex
- W2111427732
- Cited by
- 656
- References
- 28
- FWCI
- 39.38
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
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
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Agents that reason and negotiate by arguing. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1093/logcom/8.3.261
- The paper
- Parsons, S. (1998). Agents that reason and negotiate by arguing. Journal of Logic and Computation. https://doi.org/10.1093/logcom/8.3.261
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.
