Search
  • All Journals
Advanced Search
Search articles by Title, Author, Keywords, DOI
7.7CiteScore
2.0Impact Factor
Advanced Search
MAP  >  The Knowledge Engineering Review
2014 Volume 29
Article Contents
Next Previous
RESEARCH ARTICLE   Open Access    

On the integration of trust with negotiation, argumentation and semantics

  • 1.

    Dipartimento di Ingegneria Elettrica e Tecnologie dell'Informazione

  • 2.

    Department of Computer Science (DEI)

  • 3.

    Artificial Intelligence Research Institute (IIIA) of the Spanish Research Council (CSIC)

  • 4.

    Department of Computing

More Information
  • Abstract: Agreement Technologies are needed for autonomous agents to come to mutually acceptable agreements, typically on behalf of humans. These technologies include trust computing, negotiation, argumentation and semantic alignment. In this paper, we identify a number of open questions regarding the integration of computational models and tools for trust computing with negotiation, argumentation and semantic alignment. We consider these questions in general and in the context of applications in open, distributed settings such as the grid and cloud computing.
  • 加载中
  • Argente E., Criado N., Julián V., Botti V. J.2008. Designing norms in virtual organizations. In Artificial Intelligence Research and Development, Proceedings of the 11th International Conference of the Catalan Association for Artificial Intelligence, CCIA 2008, October 22–24, 2008, Sant Mart d'Empúries, Spain, volume 184 of Frontiers in Artificial Intelligence and Applications, Alsinet, T., Puyol-Gruart, J. & Torras, C. (eds). IOS Press, 16–23.

    Google Scholar

    Baselice S., Bonatti P. A., Faella M.2007. On interoperable trust negotiation strategies. In POLICY, Agrawal, D., Bertino, E. & Kagal, L. (eds). IEEE Computer Society, 39–50.

    Google Scholar

    Besnard P., Hunter A.2008. Elements of Argumentation. MIT Press.

    Google Scholar

    Bonatti P. A., De Coi J. L., Olmedilla D., Sauro L.2009. Rule-based policy representations and reasoning. In REWERSE, Bry, F. & Maluszynski, J. (eds). Lecture Notes in Computer Science 5500, 201–232. Springer.

    Google Scholar

    Bonatti P. A., De Coi J. L., Olmedilla D., Sauro L.2010. A rule-based trust negotiation system. IEEE Transactions on Knowledge and Data Engineering22(11), 1507–1520.

    Google Scholar

    Bonatti P. A., Faella M., Galdi C., Sauro L.2011. Towards a mechanism for incentivating privacy. In Proceedings of the Computer Security – ESORICS 2011 – 16th European Symposium on Research in Computer Security, Leuven, Belgium, September 12–14, 2011, Atluri V. & Díaz C. (eds). Lecture Notes in Computer Science 6879, 472–488. Springer.

    Google Scholar

    Bonatti P. A., Olmedilla D.2005. Driving and monitoring provisional trust negotiation with metapolicies. In POLICY, Winsborough, W. & Sahai, A. (eds). IEEE Computer Society, 14–23.

    Google Scholar

    Bonatti P. A., Samarati P.2003. Logics for authorizations and security. In Logics for Emerging Applications of Databases, Chomicki, J., van der Meyden, R. & Saake, G. (eds). Springer, 277–323.

    Google Scholar

    Camarinha-Matos L. M., Silveri I., Afsarmanesh I. H., Oliveira A.2005. Towards a framework for creation of dynamic virtual organizations. In Collaborative Networks and their Breeding Environments, Camarinha-Matos, L. M., Afsarmanesh, H. & Ortiz, A. (eds). Springer, 69–80.

    Google Scholar

    Cardoso H. L., Oliveira E.2005. Virtual enterprise normative framework within electronic institutions. In Engineering Societies in the Agents World V, Omicini, A., Gleizes, M. P. & Zambonelli, F. (eds), Springer, 14–32.

    Google Scholar

    Cardoso H. L., Oliveira E.2008a. Norm defeasibility in an institutional normative framework. In Proceedings of the 18th European Conference on Artificial Intelligence (ECAI 2008), Ghallab, M., Spyropoulos, C., Fakotakis, N. & Avouris, N. (eds), IOS Press, 468–472.

    Google Scholar

    Cardoso H. L., Oliveira E.2008b. A context-based institutional normative environment. In Proceedings of The AAMAS08 Workshop on Coordination, Organization, Institutions and Norms in Agent Systems (COIN), Hubner, J., Matson, E., Boissier, E., & Dignum, V. (eds), Springer, 119–133.

    Google Scholar

    Casare S. J., Sichman J. S.2005. Towards a functional ontology of reputation. In Proceedings ofthe Fourth International Joint Conference on Autonomous Agents and Multi Agent Systems, 505–511. Utrecht, The Netherlands.

    Google Scholar

    Castelfranchi C., Falcone R.2000. Trust is much more than subjective probability: mental components and sources of trust. In 33rd Annual Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences (HICSS-33), 4–7 January, 2000, Maui, Hawaii, Track 6: Internet and the Digital Economy. IEEE Computer Society.

    Google Scholar

    Choi N., Song I.-Y., Han H.2006. A survey on ontology mapping. SIGMOD Record35(3), 34–41.

    Google Scholar

    Colomer J. M.2011. Social Choice Theory, International Encyclopedia of Political Science edition. Sage.

    Google Scholar

    Conte R., Paolucci M.2002. Reputation in Artificial Societies: Social Beliefs for Social Order. Kluwer Academic Publishers.

    Google Scholar

    Craswell R.2000. Contract law: general theories. In Encyclopedia of Law and Economics, Volume III: The Regulation of Contracts, Bouckaert, B. & De Geest, G. (eds). Edward Elgar, 1–24.

    Google Scholar

    Debenham J., Sierra C.2006. Trust and honour in information-based agency. In Proceedings of the Fifth International Joint Conference on Autonomous Agents and Multi Agent Systems, AAMAS2006, 1225–1232. Hakodate, Japan.

    Google Scholar

    Dondio P., Barrett S.2007. Presumptive selection of trust evidences. In 6th International Joint Conference on Autonomous Agents and Multiagent Systems (AAMAS 2007), Honolulu, Hawaii, USA, May 14–18, 2007, Durfee, E. H., Yokoo, M., Huhns, M. N. & Shehory, O. (eds). IFAAMAS, 1078–1085.

    Google Scholar

    Dung P. M., Thang P. M.2009. Modular argumentation for modelling legal doctrines in common law of contract. Artificial Intelligence and Law17(3), 167–182.

    Google Scholar

    Fabregues A., Sierra C.2009. A Testbed for Multiagent Systems. Technical report, IIIA-CSIC.

    Google Scholar

    Fidora A., Sierra C. (eds). 2011. Ramon Llull: From the Ars Magna to Artificial Intelligence. IIIA-CSIC.

    Google Scholar

    Fullam K. K., Klos T. B., Muller G., Sabater J., Schlosser A., Topol Z., Barber K. S., Rosenschein J. S., Vercouter L., Voss M.2005. A specification of the agent reputation and trust (art) testbed: experimentation and competition for trust in agent societies. In Proceedings of the4th International Joint Conference on Autonomous Agents and Multi-Agent Systems (AAMAS-2005), 512–518. Utrecht, The Netherlands.

    Google Scholar

    Golbeck J.2009. Trust and nuanced profile similarity in online social networks. ACM Transactions on the Web3(4), 1–33.

    Google Scholar

    Gong L., Ellison G.2003. Inside Java(TM) 2 Platform Security: Architecture, API Design, and Implementation, 2nd edn.Pearson Education.

    Google Scholar

    Grabowski M., Roberts K. H.1999. Risk mitigation in virtual organizations. Organization Science10(6), 704–721.

    Google Scholar

    Heras S., Criado N., Argente E., Julian V.2009. Norm emergency through argumentation. Journal of Physical Agents3, 31–38.

    Google Scholar

    Hogan A., Harth A., Polleres A.2009. Scalable authoritative OWL reasoning for the web. International Journal on Semantic Web and Information Systems5(2), 49–90.

    Google Scholar

    Huynh T. D., Jennings N. R., Shadbolt N. R.2006. An integrated trust and reputation model for open multi-agent systems. Autonomous Agents and Multi-Agent Systems13(2), 119–154.

    Google Scholar

    Jajodia S., Samarati P., Sapino M. L., Subrahmanian V. S.2001. Flexible support for multiple access control policies. ACM Transactions on Database Systems26(2), 214–260.

    Google Scholar

    Kaplow L.2000. General characteristics of rules. In Encyclopedia of Law and Economics, V: The Economics of Crime and Litigation, Bouckaert, B. & De Geest, G. (eds). Edward Elgar, 502–528.

    Google Scholar

    Karlins M., Abelson H. I.1970. Persuasion. Crosby Lockwood & Son.

    Google Scholar

    Koster A., Sabater-Mir J., Schorlemmer M.2010. Inductively generated trust alignments based on shared interactions. In Proceedings of the Ninth International Joint Conference on Autonomous Agents and Multi Agent Systems, Toronto, Canada.

    Google Scholar

    Krause P., Ambler S., Elvang-Gøransson M., Fox J.1995. A logic of argumentation for reasoning under uncertainty. Computational Intelligence11, 113–131.

    Google Scholar

    Lacomme L., Demazeau Y., Camps V.2009. Personalization of a trust network. In Agents and Artificial Intelligence, Filipe, J., Fred, A. & Sharp, B. (eds), Communications in Computer and Information Science, Springer, 247–259.

    Google Scholar

    Lee A. J., Winslett M.2006. Virtual fingerprinting as a foundation for reputation in open systems. In iTrust, Stølen, K., Winsborough, W. H., Martinelli, F. & Massacci F. (eds). Lecture Notes in Computer Science 3986, 236–251. Springer.

    Google Scholar

    Lenzini G., Sahli N., Eertink H.2008. Agents selecting trustworthy recommendations in mobile virtual communities. In AAMAS-TRUST, Falcone, R., Suzanne Barber, K., Sabater-Mir, J. & Singh, M. P. (eds). Lecture Notes in Computer Science 5396, Springer, 182–204.

    Google Scholar

    Luck M., Munroe S., Ashri R., López y López F. 2004. Trust and norms for interaction. In Proceedings of the IEEE International Conference on Systems, Man & Cybernetics. IEEE, 1944–1949.

    Google Scholar

    Matt P.-A., Morge M., Toni F.2010. Combining statistics and arguments to compute trust. In Proceedings of the 9th International Conference on Autonomous Agents and Multiagent Systems (AAMAS 2010), van der Hoek, W. & Kaminka, G. A. (eds). IFAAMAS, Toronto, Canada, 209–216.

    Google Scholar

    Matt P.-A., Toni F., Stournaras T., Dimitrelos D.2008. Argumentation-based agents for e-procurement. In Proceedings of the 7th International Conference on Autonomous Agents and Multiagent Systems. Estoril, Portugal.

    Google Scholar

    McGinnis J., Stathis K., Toni F.2011. A formal model of agent-oriented virtual organisations and their formation. Multiagent and Grid Systems7(6), 291–310.

    Google Scholar

    Melaye D., Demazeau Y.2005. Bayesian dynamic trust model. In Pechoucek, M., Petta, P. & Varga, L. (eds). Multi-Agent Systems and Applications IV, LNCS, 3690, 480–489. Springer.

    Google Scholar

    Miles S., Groth P., Munroe S., Moreau L.2009a. PrIMe: a methodology for developing provenance-aware applications. ACM Transactions on Software Engineering and Methodology20(3), 1–42.

    Google Scholar

    Miles S., Groth P., Oren N., Luck M.2009b. Handling mitigating circumstances for electronic contracts. In Proceedings of the 7th European Workshop on Multi-Agent Systems, Ayia Napa, Cyprus.

    Google Scholar

    Moreau L., Clifford B., Freire J., Futrelle J., Gil Y., Groth P., Kwasnikowska N., Miles S., Missier P., Myers J., Plale B., Simmhan Y., Stephan E., Van den Bussche J.2011. The open provenance model core specification (v1.1). Future Generation Computer Systems27(6), 743–756.

    Google Scholar

    Mui L., Mohtashemi M., Halberstadt A.2002. A computational model for trust and reputation. In Proceedings of the 35th Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences, Hawaii, USA.

    Google Scholar

    Noy N. F.2004. Semantic integration: a survey of ontology-based approaches. SIGMOD Record33(4), 65–70.

    Google Scholar

    Ossowski S.2008a. Coordination and agreement in multi-agent systems. In Cooperative Information Agents XII, 12th International Workshop, CIA 2008, Prague, Czech Republic, September 10–12, 2008,Proceedings, Klusch, M., Pechoucek, M. & Polleres, A., (eds). Lecture Notes in Computer Science 5180, 16–23. Springer.

    Google Scholar

    Ossowski S.2008b. Coordination in multi-agent systems: towards a technology of agreement. In Multiagent System Technologies, 6th German Conference, MATES 2008, Kaiserslautern, Germany, September 23–26, 2008, Proceedings, Bergmann, R., Lindemann, G., Kirn, S. & Pechoucek, M. (eds). Lecture Notes in Computer Science 5244, 2–12. Springer.

    Google Scholar

    Parsons S., McBurney P., Sklar E.2010. Reasoning about trust using argumentation: a position paper. In Proceedings of the Seventh International Workshop on Argumentation in Multi-Agent Systems (ArgMAS 2010), affiliated to AAMAS 2010, Toronto, Canada.

    Google Scholar

    Pinyol I., Sabater-Mir J.2009. Towards the de_nition of an argumentation framework using repu-tation information. In Proceedings of the 12th Workshop on Trust in Agent Societies(TRUST@AAMAS'09), Budapest, Hungary.

    Google Scholar

    Pinyol I., Sabater-Mir J., Cuni G.2007. How to talk about reputation using a common ontology: from definition to implementation. In Proceedings of the Ninth Workshop on Trust in Agent Societies, 90–102, Hawaii, USA.

    Google Scholar

    Poblet M. (ed.) 2008. Proceedings of the 5th International Workshop on Online Dispute Resolution, in conjunction with the 21st International Conference on Legal Knowledge and Information Systems (JURIX 2008), December 13, 2008, Firenze, Italy, volume 430 of CEUR Workshop Proceedings, CEUR-WS.org.

    Google Scholar

    Prade H., Subrahmanian V. S.2007. A qualitative bipolar argumentative view of trust. In Scalable Uncertainty Management, First International Conference, SUM 2007, October 10–12, 2007, Washington, DC, USA. Lecture Notes in Computer Science 4772, 268–276.

    Google Scholar

    Rahwan I., Ramchurn S. D., Jennings N. R., McBurney P., Parsons S., Sonenberg L.2003. Argumentation-based negotiation. The Knowledge Engineering Review18(4), 343–375.

    Google Scholar

    Rahwan I., Simari G. (ed.). 2009. Argumentation in AI: The Book. Springer.

    Google Scholar

    Regan K., Cohen R.2005. Indirect reputation assessment for adaptive buying agents in electronic markets. BusinessAgents and the Semantic Web Workshop1, Victoria, British Columbia, Canada, 121–130.

    Google Scholar

    Sabater J., Sierra C.2005. Review on computational trust and reputation models. Artificial Intelligence Review24(1), 33–60.

    Google Scholar

    Sadeh N. M., Hong J. I., Cranor L. F., Fette I., Kelley P. G., Prabaker M. K., Rao J.2009. Under-standing and capturing people's privacy policies in a mobile social networking application. Personal and Ubiquitous Computing13(6), 401–412.

    Google Scholar

    Sierra C., Debenham J.2007. The logic negotiation model. In Proceedings of the Sixth International Joint Conference on Autonomous Agents and Multi-agent Systems, 1026–1033, Haway, USA.

    Google Scholar

    Sierra C., Debenham J.2008. Information-based argumentation. In Proceedings of the 11th International Conference on Principles of Knowledge Representation and Reasoning: Workshop on Knowledge Representation for Agents and Multiagent Systems (KRAMAS 2008), Meyer, J.-J. Ch. & Broersen, J. (eds), 155–170.

    Google Scholar

    Sierra C., Debenham J.2009. Information-based reputation. In Proceedings of the First International Conference on Reputation: Theory and Technology, 5–19, Gargonza, Italy.

    Google Scholar

    Sierra C., Sabater-Mir J.2005. Review on computational trust and reputation models. Artificial Intelligence Review24(1), 33–60.

    Google Scholar

    Staab S., Bhargava B. K., Lilien L., Rosenthal A., Winslett M., Sloman M., Dillon T. S., Chang E., Hussain F. K., Nejdl W., Olmedilla D., Kashyap V.2004. The pudding of trust. IEEE Intelligent Systems19(5), 74–88.

    Google Scholar

    Staab E., Engel T.2008. Combining cognitive with computational trust reasoning. In Trust in Agent Societies, 11th International Workshop, TRUST 2008, May 12–13, 2008, Falcone, R., Barber, K. S., Sabater-Mir, J. & Singh, M. P. (eds). Lecture Notes in Computer Science 5396, Springer.

    Google Scholar

    Stanoevska K., Parrilli D. M., Thanos G.2008. BEinGRID: development of business models for the grid industry. In Grid Economics and Business Models. Lecture Notes in Computer Science 5206, 140–151, Springer.

    Google Scholar

    Tavakolifard M., Herrmann P., Ozturk P.2009. Analogical trust reasoning. In Trust Management III, Ferrari, E., Li, N., Bertino, E. & Karabulut, Y. (eds). Springer, 149–163.

    Google Scholar

    Urbano J., Rocha A. P., Oliveira E.2009. Computing confidence values: Does trust dynamics matter? In Lopes L. S., Mariano P., Lau N. & Rocha L. M. (eds). Progress in Artificial Intelligence, Lecture Notes in Artificial Intelligence 5816, Springer, 520–531.

    Google Scholar

    Urbano J., Cardoso H. L., Oliveira E.2010a. Making electronic contracting operational and trustworthy. In Advances in Artificial Intelligence – Proceedings of the 12thIbero-American Conference on Artificial Intelligence (IBERAMIA 2010), Kuri-Morales, A. & Simari, G. R. (eds). Springer, 264–273.

    Google Scholar

    Urbano J., Rocha A., Oliveira E.2010b. Trust estimation using contextual fitness. In Agent and Multi-Agent Systems: Technologies and Applications, Jedrzejowicz, P., Nguyen, N., Howlett, R. & Jain, L. (eds). Lecture Notes in Computer Science 6070, 42–51. Springer.

    Google Scholar

    Urbano J., Rocha A. P., Oliveira E.2010c. Trustworthiness tendency incremental extraction using information gain. In Web Intelligence and Intelligent Agent Technology (WI-IAT), 2010, IEEE/WIC/ACM International Conference, 2, 411–414.

    Google Scholar

    Urbano J., Rocha A. P., Oliveira E.2011. Extracting trustworthiness tendencies using the frequency increase metric. In Enterprise Information Systems, Aalst, W., Mylopoulos, J., Rosemann, M., Shaw, M. J., Szyperski, C., Filipe, J. & Cordeiro, J. (eds). Lecture Notes in Business Information Processing 73, 208–221. Springer.

    Google Scholar

    Winslett M., Yu T., Seamons K. E., Hess A., Jacobson J., Jarvis R., Smith B., Yu L.2002. Negotiating trust on the web. IEEE Internet Computing6(6), 30–37.

    Google Scholar

    Young J.2008. Trust in virtual organisations: a synthesis of the literature. IJNVO5(3/4), 244–258.

    Google Scholar

    Yu B., Singh M. P.2002. Distributed reputation management for electronic commerce. Computational Intelligence18(4), 535–549.

    Google Scholar

    Yu T., Winslett M., Seamons K. E.2001. Interoperable strategies in automated trust negotiation. In CCS '01: Proceedings of the 8th ACM conference on Computer and Communications Security, Reiter, M. K. & Samarati, P. (eds). ACM Press, 146–155.

    Google Scholar

    Yu T., Winslett M., Seamons K.2003. Supporting structured credentials and sensitive policies through interoperable strategies in automated trust negotiation. ACM Transactions on Information and System Security6(1), 1–42.

    Google Scholar

    Zeleznikow J.2008. Beyond interest based bargaining – incorporating interests and fairness in the development of negotiation support systems. In Proceedings of the 5th International Workshop on Online Dispute Resolution, in conjunction with the 21st International Conference on Legal Knowledge and Information Systems (JURIX 2008), Firenze, Italy, December 13, 2008, volume 430 of CEUR Workshop Proceedings, Poblet M. (ed.). CEUR-WS.org.

    Google Scholar

  • Cite this article

    Piero Bonatti, Eugenio Oliveira, Jordi Sabater-Mir, Carles Sierra, Francesca Toni. 2014. On the integration of trust with negotiation, argumentation and semantics. The Knowledge Engineering Review 29(1)31−50, doi: 10.1017/S0269888913000064
    Piero Bonatti, Eugenio Oliveira, Jordi Sabater-Mir, Carles Sierra, Francesca Toni. 2014. On the integration of trust with negotiation, argumentation and semantics. The Knowledge Engineering Review 29(1)31−50, doi: 10.1017/S0269888913000064
    shu
Download PDF

Article Metrics

Article views(14) PDF downloads(10)

Other Articles By Authors

RESEARCH ARTICLE   Open Access    

On the integration of trust with negotiation, argumentation and semantics

  • 1.

    Dipartimento di Ingegneria Elettrica e Tecnologie dell'Informazione

  • 2.

    Department of Computer Science (DEI)

  • 3.

    Artificial Intelligence Research Institute (IIIA) of the Spanish Research Council (CSIC)

  • 4.

    Department of Computing

  • Published online: 21 March 2013
The Knowledge Engineering Review  29,  2014, 29(1): 31−50  |  Cite this article

Abstract: Abstract: Agreement Technologies are needed for autonomous agents to come to mutually acceptable agreements, typically on behalf of humans. These technologies include trust computing, negotiation, argumentation and semantic alignment. In this paper, we identify a number of open questions regarding the integration of computational models and tools for trust computing with negotiation, argumentation and semantic alignment. We consider these questions in general and in the context of applications in open, distributed settings such as the grid and cloud computing.

    HTML

    Acknowledgments

    • This work was partially supported by the Agreement Technology COST action (IC0801). The authors would like to thank for helpful discussions and comments all participants in the panel on ‘Trust, Argumentation and Semantics’ on 16 December 2009, Agia Napa, Cyprus.

    • http://www.bbb.org/

    • www.liquidpub.org

    • http://megatron.iiia.csic.es/art-testbed/index.html

    • www.dipgame.org

    • www.argugrid.eu

    • United Nations, E-Commerce and Development Report 2003, http://www.unctad.org/ecommerce/2003

    • http://pages.ebay.com/services/buyandsell/disputeres.html

    • http://gigaom.com/2008/07/01/10-reasons-enterprises-arent-ready-to-trust-the-cloud/

    Rights and permissions
    • Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2013 2013Cambridge University Press
References (79)
  • About this article
    Cite this article
    Piero Bonatti, Eugenio Oliveira, Jordi Sabater-Mir, Carles Sierra, Francesca Toni. 2014. On the integration of trust with negotiation, argumentation and semantics. The Knowledge Engineering Review 29(1)31−50, doi: 10.1017/S0269888913000064
    Piero Bonatti, Eugenio Oliveira, Jordi Sabater-Mir, Carles Sierra, Francesca Toni. 2014. On the integration of trust with negotiation, argumentation and semantics. The Knowledge Engineering Review 29(1)31−50, doi: 10.1017/S0269888913000064
    shu

    • Catalog

      /

      DownLoad:  Full-Size Img  PowerPoint
      Return
      Return