Advertisement

CONOISE: Agent-Based Formation of Virtual Organisations

  • Timothy J. Norman
  • Alun Preece
  • Stuart Chalmers
  • Nicholas R. Jennings
  • Michael Luck
  • Viet D. Dang
  • Thuc D. Nguyen
  • Vikas Deora
  • Jianhua Shao
  • W. Alex Gray
  • Nick J. Fiddian

Abstract

Virtual organisations (VOs) are composed of a number of individuals, departments or organisations each of which has a range of capabilities and resources at their disposal. These VOs are formed so that resources may be pooled and services combined with a view to the exploitation of a perceived market niche. However, in the modern commercial environment it is essential to respond rapidly to changes in the market to remain competitive. Thus, there is a need for robust, flexible systems to support the process of VO management. Within the CONOISE (www.conoise.org) project, agent-based models and techniques are being developed for the automated formation and maintenance of virtual organisations. In this paper we focus on a critical element of VO management: how an effective VO may be formed rapidly for a specified purpose.

Keywords

Virtual Organisation Combinatorial Auction News Service Quality Agent Quality Expectation 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. [1]
    P. Baptiste, C. Le Pape and W. Nuijten, Constraint-based scheduling: Applying constraint programming to scheduling problems, International Series in Operations Research and Management Science Volume 39, 2001.Google Scholar
  2. [2]
    M. Burgess, and W.A. Gray, and N. Fiddian, Establishing a taxanomy of quality for use in information filtering, Proceedings of 19th British National Conference on Databases, 2002.Google Scholar
  3. [3]
    Y. Caseau and F. Laburthe, Cumulative scheduling with task intervals, Logic Programing Proceedings of the 1996 Joint International Conference and Symposium on Logic Programming, 363–377, 1996.Google Scholar
  4. [4]
    V.D. Dang and N.R. Jennings, Polynomial algorithms for clearing multiunit single-item and multi-unit combinatorial auctions, Artificial Intelligence, (to appear).Google Scholar
  5. [5]
    M. Eso, S. Ghosh, J. Kalagnanam and L. Ladanyi, Bid evaluation in procurement auctions with piece-wise linear supply curves. IBM Research Report RC 22219, 2001.Google Scholar
  6. [6]
    N.R. Jennings, P. Faratin, T.J. Norman, P. O’Brien, and B. Odgers Autonomous Agents for Business Process Management, International Journal of Applied Artificial Intelligence, 14(2):145–189, 2000.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. [7]
    Y.W. Lee, D. M. Strong, B. K. Khan and R. Y. Wang, AIMQ: A methodology for information quality assessment, Information and Management, 40:133–146, 2002.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. [8]
    M. Luck, P. McBurney and C. Preist, Agent technology: Enabling next generation computing (a roadmap for agent based computing), AgentLink, 2003.Google Scholar
  9. [9]
    L. Mui, A. Halberstadt and M. Mohtashemi, Notions of reputation in multiagent systems: A review, Proceedings of First International Joint Conference on Autonomous Agents and Multi-Agent Systems, 2002.Google Scholar
  10. [10]
    T.D. Nguyen and N. R. Jennings, A heuristic model for concurrent bilateral negotiations in incomplete information settings, Proceedings of the Eighteenth International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence, 2003.Google Scholar
  11. [11]
    A. Parasuraman, V. A. Zeithaml and L. L. Berry, Reassessment of expectations as a comparison standard in measuring service quality: Implications for future research, Journal of Marketing, 58:201–230, 1994.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. [12]
    S.A. Petersen and M. Gruninger, An agent-based model to support the formation of virtual enterprises, International ICSC Symposium on Mobile Agents and Multi-agents in Virtual Organisations and E-Commerce, 2000.Google Scholar
  13. [13]
    A.D. Preece, K. Hui, A. Gray, P. Marti, T. Bench-Capon, D. Jones and Z. Cui, The KRAFT architecture for knowledge fusion and transformation, Knowledge-Based Systems, 13(2-3) 113–120, 2000.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. [14]
    T. Sandholm and S. Suri, Market clearability, Proceedings of The Seventeenth International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence, 1145–1151, 2001.Google Scholar
  15. [15]
    P.R. Wurman, Dynamic pricing in the virtual marketplace, IEEE Internet Computing, 5(2):36–42, 2001.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. [16]
    B. Yu and M. Singh, Distributed reputation management for electronic commerce, Proceedings of First International Conference on Autonomous Agents and Multi Agent Systems, 2002.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag London 2004

Authors and Affiliations

  • Timothy J. Norman
    • 1
  • Alun Preece
    • 1
  • Stuart Chalmers
    • 1
  • Nicholas R. Jennings
    • 2
  • Michael Luck
    • 2
  • Viet D. Dang
    • 2
  • Thuc D. Nguyen
    • 2
  • Vikas Deora
    • 3
  • Jianhua Shao
    • 3
  • W. Alex Gray
    • 3
  • Nick J. Fiddian
    • 3
  1. 1.Dept of Computing ScienceUniversity of AberdeenAberdeenUK
  2. 2.Dept of Electronics and Computing ScienceUniversity of SouthamptonSouthamptonUK
  3. 3.Dept of Computer ScienceCardiff UniversityCardiffUK

Personalised recommendations