4.6 Article

Complex and Concurrent Negotiations for Multiple Interrelated e-Markets

Journal

IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON CYBERNETICS
Volume 43, Issue 1, Pages 230-245

Publisher

IEEE-INST ELECTRICAL ELECTRONICS ENGINEERS INC
DOI: 10.1109/TSMCB.2012.2204742

Keywords

Agent-based Cloud computing; automated negotiation; bargaining; cloud economics; cloud resource allocation; complex negotiation; concurrent negotiation; negotiation agent

Funding

  1. Korean Government (MEST) [KRF-2009-220-D00092]
  2. Korea Research Foundation

Ask authors/readers for more resources

To date, most of the existing bargaining models are designed for supporting negotiation in only one market involving only two types of participants (buyers and sellers). This work devises a complex negotiation mechanism that supports negotiation activities among three types of participants in multiple interrelated markets. The complex negotiation mechanism consists of: 1) a bargaining-position-estimation (BPE) strategy for the multilateral negotiations between consumer and broker agents in a service market and 2) a regression-based coordination (RBC) strategy for concurrent negotiations between broker and provider agents in multiple resource markets. The negotiation outcomes between broker and provider agents in a resource market can potentially influence the negotiation outcomes between broker and consumer agents in a service market. Empirical results show that agents adopting the BPE strategy can better respond to different market conditions than agents adopting the time-dependent strategy because they do not make excessive (respectively, inadequate) amounts of concessions in favorable (respectively, unfavorable) markets. In the concurrent negotiations in multiple resource markets, empirical results show that broker agents adopting the RBC strategy achieved significantly higher utilities, higher success rates, and faster negotiation speed than broker agents adopting the utility-oriented and patient coordination strategies.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available