Skip to main content

The Challenge of Negotiation in the Game of Diplomacy

  • Conference paper
  • First Online:
Book cover Agreement Technologies (AT 2018)

Part of the book series: Lecture Notes in Computer Science ((LNAI,volume 11327))

Included in the following conference series:

Abstract

The game of Diplomacy has been used as a test case for complex automated negotiations for a long time, but to date very few successful negotiation algorithms have been implemented for this game. We have therefore decided to include a Diplomacy tournament within the annual Automated Negotiating Agents Competition (ANAC). In this paper we present the setup and the results of the ANAC 2017 Diplomacy Competition and the ANAC 2018 Diplomacy Challenge. We observe that none of the negotiation algorithms submitted to these two editions have been able to significantly improve the performance over a non-negotiating baseline agent. We analyze these algorithms and discuss why it is so hard to write successful negotiation algorithms for Diplomacy. Finally, we provide experimental evidence that, despite these results, coalition formation and coordination do form essential elements of the game.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 39.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 54.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Notes

  1. 1.

    http://www.daide.org.uk.

  2. 2.

    https://icga.leidenuniv.nl/?page_id=987.

  3. 3.

    One might argue that Diplomacy does have hidden information, because players make secret agreements. However, these agreements have no formal meaning, and form part of the players’ strategies rather than of the rules of the game. Therefore, formally speaking there is no hidden information.

  4. 4.

    http://www.playdiplomacy.com/.

  5. 5.

    https://pypi.python.org/pypi/Parlance/1.4.1.

  6. 6.

    It would have been better to assign each agent to each Power an equal number of times, because some Powers are stronger than others. Unfortunately, however, the Parlance game server does not provide this option.

  7. 7.

    With respect to the null-hypothesis that each agent has a mean score of \(\frac{34}{7}\) Supply Centers per game.

  8. 8.

    Table 5 shows a value of 9.08 instead of 9.09. This difference is due to rounding errors.

References

  1. Aydoğan, R., Fujita, K., Baarslag, T., Jonker, C.M., Ito, T.: ANAC 2017: repeated multilateral negotiation league. In: The 11th International Workshop on Automated Negotiation, ACAN 2018 (2018)

    Google Scholar 

  2. Aydoğan, R., et al.: A baseline for nonlinear bilateral negotiations: the full results of the agents competing in ANAC 2014, pp. 96–122. Bentham Science Publishers (2017)

    Google Scholar 

  3. Baarslag, T., Aydoğan, R., Hindriks, K.V., Fuijita, K., Ito, T., Jonker, C.M.: The automated negotiating agents competition, 2010–2015. AI Mag. 36(4), 115–118 (2015)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Baarslag, T., Hindriks, K., Jonker, C., Kraus, S., Lin, R.: The first Automated Negotiating Agents Competition (ANAC 2010). In: Ito, T., Zhang, M., Robu, V., Fatima, S., Matsuo, T. (eds.) New Trends in Agent-Based Complex Automated Negotiations. SCI, vol. 383, pp. 113–135. Springer, Heidelberg (2012). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-24696-8_7

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  5. Fabregues, A.: Facing the challenge of human-aware negotiation. Ph.D. thesis, Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona (2012)

    Google Scholar 

  6. Fabregues, A., Sierra, C.: DipGame: a challenging negotiation testbed. Eng. Appl. Artif. Intell. 24(7), 1137–1146 (2011)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Ferreira, A., Lopes Cardoso, H., Reis, L.P.: DipBlue: a diplomacy agent with strategic and trust reasoning. In: ICAART 2015 - Proceedings of the International Conference on Agents and Artificial Intelligence, Lisbon, Portugal, 10–12 January 2015, vol. 1, pp. 54–65. SciTePress (2015)

    Google Scholar 

  8. Fujita, K., Aydoğan, R., Baarslag, T., Ito, T., Jonker, C.: The fifth Automated Negotiating Agents Competition (ANAC 2014). In: Fukuta, N., Ito, T., Zhang, M., Fujita, K., Robu, V. (eds.) Recent Advances in Agent-based Complex Automated Negotiation. SCI, vol. 638, pp. 211–224. Springer, Cham (2016). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-30307-9_13

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  9. de Jonge, D., Sierra, C.: NB3: a multilateral negotiation algorithm for large, non-linear agreement spaces with limited time. Auton. Agent. Multi-Agent Syst. 29(5), 896–942 (2015)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. de Jonge, D., Sierra, C.: D-Brane: a diplomacy playing agent for automated negotiations research. Appl. Intell. 47(1), 158–177 (2017)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. de Jonge, D., Zhang, D.: Automated negotiations for general game playing. In: Proceedings of the 16th Conference on Autonomous Agents and MultiAgent Systems, AAMAS 2017, São Paulo, Brazil, 8–12 May 2017, pp. 371–379. ACM (2017)

    Google Scholar 

  12. Marinheiro, J., Lopes Cardoso, H.: Towards general cooperative game playing. In: Nguyen, N.T., Kowalczyk, R., van den Herik, J., Rocha, A.P., Filipe, J. (eds.) Transactions on Computational Collective Intelligence XXVIII. LNCS, vol. 10780, pp. 164–192. Springer, Cham (2018). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-78301-7_8

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  13. Mell, J., Gratch, J., Baarslag, T., Aydoğan, R., Jonker, C.: Results of the first annual human-agent league of the automated negotiating agents competition. In: Proceedings of the 2018 International Conference on Intelligent Virtual Agents (2018)

    Google Scholar 

  14. Ephrati, E., Kraus, S., Lehman, D.: An automated diplomacy player. In: Levy, D., Beal, D. (eds.) Heuristic Programming in Artificial Intelligence: The 1st Computer Olympia, pp. 134–153. Ellis Horwood Limited, Chicester (1989)

    Google Scholar 

  15. Silver, D., et al.: Mastering the game of go with deep neural networks and tree search. Nature 529(7587), 484–489 (2016)

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

This work is part of the Veni research programme with project number 639.021.751, which is financed by the Netherlands Organisation for Scientific Research (NWO), and project LOGISTAR, funded by the E.U. Horizon 2020 research and innovation programme, Grant Agreement No. 769142.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Dave de Jonge .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2019 Springer Nature Switzerland AG

About this paper

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this paper

de Jonge, D., Baarslag, T., Aydoğan, R., Jonker, C., Fujita, K., Ito, T. (2019). The Challenge of Negotiation in the Game of Diplomacy. In: Lujak, M. (eds) Agreement Technologies. AT 2018. Lecture Notes in Computer Science(), vol 11327. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-17294-7_8

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-17294-7_8

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-030-17293-0

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-030-17294-7

  • eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics