Using Messaging Structure to Evolve Agents Roles in Electronic Markets
- 346 Downloads
Exogenous dynamics play a central role in survival and evolution of institutions. In this paper, we develop an approach to automate part of this evolution process for electronic market places which bring together many online buyers and suppliers. In particular, for a given market place, we focus on other market places doing similar business, as a form of exogenous evolutionary factor. Automatically tracking and analyzing how other market places do their business has a number of difficulties; for example, different electronic markets- with similar purpose- might use different names for similar agent roles and tasks. In this paper, we argue that low level analysis of sequences of messages exchanged between agents within e-markets is an effective mechanism in integrating similar roles specifications, independent of what names these roles – or even the messages themselves – may take. We focus on the structure of messages (message schemas), sequences of message schemas, sets of sequences of message schemas to compare and integrate roles. Using statistical analysis over such structures we bypass the difficult problem of identifying semantics of roles and exchanged messages through their human readable names (syntactic forms). To allow such low level analysis, different e-market specifications are expressed using the same language. Our language of choice is a recently developed multi agent systems specification language, Islander 2.0. We illustrate our approach with example specifications and institutions simulation traces.
KeywordsMulti Agent System Multiagent System Market Place Electronic Market Electronic Market Place
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
- 1.Apesteguia, J.J.: Institutions and Institutional Evolution. In: Workshop In Political Theory and Policy Analysis. Indiana University, Indiana (1998)Google Scholar
- 3.Bellifemine, F., Poggi, A., Rimassa, G.: Developing multi agent systems with a FIPAcompliant agent framework. In: Software Practice and Experience, pp. 103–128. John Wiley and Sons, Chichester (2001)Google Scholar
- 4.Beydoun, G., Breis, J.T.F., et al.: Statistical Monitoring of Ontology Integration for Corporate Memory. In: Pacific Rim Knowledge Acquisition Conference (PKAW 2002), Japan (2002)Google Scholar
- 6.Esteva, M.: Electronic Institutions: From Specification To Development. In: Artificial Intelligence Research Insitute. UAB - Universitat Autonma de Barcelona, Barcelona (2003)Google Scholar
- 7.Esteva, M., Cruz, D.d.l., Sierra, C.: ISLANDER: an electronic institutions editor. In: International Conference on Autonomous Agents & Multiagent Systems (AAMAS 2002). ACM, Italy (2002)Google Scholar
- 8.Hurwick, L.: Toward Analyzing Institutions and Institutional Change. In: Bowles, S., Gintis, H., Gustafsson, B. (eds.) Markets and Democracy, pp. 51–67. Cambridge University Press, New York (1993)Google Scholar
- 9.Omelayenko, B.: Syntactic-Level Ontology Integration Rules for E-commerce. In: 14th FLAIRS Conference. AAAI Press, Florida (2001)Google Scholar
- 10.Rodriguez, J.A.: On The Design and Construction of Agent-Mediated Electronic Institutions. In: Artificial Intelligence Research Insitute. UAB - Universitat Autonma de Barcelona, Barcelona (2003)Google Scholar
- 12.Wache, H., Vogele, T., et al.: Ontology-Based Integration of Information - A Survey of Existing Approaches. In: IJCAI Workshop on Ontologies and Information Sharing, Seattle (2001)Google Scholar