scispace - formally typeset
Open AccessDissertation

Designing and trusting multi-agent systems for B2B applications

Rafiul Alam
Reads0
Chats0
TLDR
A trust model allowing agents to evaluate the credibility of other peers in the environment using agents' credibility is proposed, which applies a number of measurements in trust evaluation of other party's likely behavior.
Abstract
This thesis includes two main contributions. The first one is designing and implementing B usiness-to-B usiness (B2B ) applications using multi-agent systems and computational argumentation theory. The second one is trust management in such multi-agent systems using agents' credibility. Our first contribution presents a framework for modeling and deploying B2B applications, with autonomous agents exposing the individual components that implement these applications. This framework consists of three levels identified by strategic, application, and resource, with focus here on the first two levels. The strategic level is about the common vision that independent businesses define as part of their decision of partnership. The application level is about the business processes, which are virtually integrated as result of this common vision. Since conflicts are bound to arise among the independent applications/agents, the framework uses a formal model based upon computational argumentation theory through a persuasion protocol to detect and resolve these conflicts. Termination, soundness, and completeness properties of this protocol are presented. Distributed and centralized coordination strategies are also supported in this framework, which is illustrated with an online purchasing case study followed by its implementation in Jadex, a java-based platform for multi-agent systems. An important issue in such open multi-agent systems is how much agents trust each other. Considering the size of these systems, agents that are service providers or customers in a B2B setting cannot avoid interacting with others that are unknown or partially known regarding to some past experience. Due to the fact that agents are self-interested, they may jeopardize the mutual trust by not performing the actions as they are supposed to. To this end, our second contribution is proposing a trust model allowing agents to evaluate the credibility of other peers in the environment. Our multi-factor model applies a number of measurements in trust evaluation of other party's likely behavior. After a period of time, the actual performance of the testimony agent is compared against the information provided by interfering agents. This comparison process leads to both adjusting the credibility of the contributing agents in trust evaluation and improving the system trust evaluation by minimizing the estimation error.

read more

Content maybe subject to copyright    Report

Citations
More filters
Journal Article

Relating protocols for dynamic dispute with logics for defeasible argumentation

TL;DR: In this paper, the authors investigated to what extent protocols for dynamic disputes, i.e., disputes in which the information base can vary at different stages, can be justified in terms of logics for defeasible argumentation.
Dissertation

Sistema de Medida de Confianca para Selecc ¸ ˜ ao de Empresas em Sistemas B2B

TL;DR: The designing and specification of a trust and contextual information aggregation model, intended to be a reliable alternative to the trust aggregation models already existing, and trying to set apart from those by including rules to emulate human common sense regarding trust building, and mechanisms to obtain a recommendation grade concerning how likely is a potential partner to perform as the authors desire in the fulfilment of a given contract.
References
More filters
Journal ArticleDOI

An agent-based approach for building complex software systems

TL;DR: This article will argue that analyzing, designing, and implementing complex software systems as a collection of interacting, autonomous agents (that is, as a multiagent system) affords software engineers a number of significant advantages over contemporary methods.
Book

Commitment in Dialogue: Basic Concepts of Interpersonal Reasoning

TL;DR: In this paper, commitment in dialogue basic concepts of interpersonal reasoning have been discussed and discussed in the context of interactive dialogues, and the authors propose a commitment-in-discriminative dialogue framework.
Book

Argumentation, Communication, and Fallacies: A Pragma-dialectical Perspective

TL;DR: In this article, the authors characterize argumentation as a complex speech act in a critical discussion aimed at resolving a difference of opinion, and discuss the communicative and interactional aspects of the speech acts performed in resolving a simple or complex dispute.
Book ChapterDOI

Proof of proposition 3

Related Papers (5)