Browse > Article

Analysis on the Bargaining Game Using Artificial Agents  

Chang, Seok-cheol (Dongbu Information Technology Co., Ltd.)
Soak, Sang-moon (Korean Intellectual Property Office, Gov.Complex Daejeon Bldg.)
Yun, Joung-il (Electronics and Telecommunications Research Institute (ETRI), Radio & Broadcasting Research Division, Broadcasting System Research Group)
Yoon, Jung-won (School of Mechanical and Aerospace Engineering and ReCAPT, Gyeongsang National University)
Ahn, Byung-ha (Mechatronics Department, GIST)
Publication Information
Journal of Korean Institute of Industrial Engineers / v.32, no.3, 2006 , pp. 172-179 More about this Journal
Abstract
Over the past few years, a considerable number of studies have been conducted on modeling the bargaining game using artificial agents on within-model interaction. However, very few attempts have been made at study on between-model interaction. This paper investigates the interaction and co-evolutionary process among heterogeneous artificial agents in the bargaining game. We present two kinds of the artificial agents participating in the bargaining game. They play some bargaining games with their strategies based on genetic algorithm (GA) and reinforcement learning (RL). We compare agents' performance between two agents under various conditions which are the changes of the parameters of artificial agents and the maximal number of round in the bargaining game. Finally, we discuss which agents show better performance and why the results are produced.
Keywords
Bargaining Game; Artificial Agent;
Citations & Related Records
연도 인용수 순위
  • Reference
1 Berninghaus, S., Guth, W., Lechler, R., and Ramser, H.-J. (2002), Decentralized versus collective bargaining - An experimental study, International journal of game theory, 7(3), 437-448
2 Kagel, J. H., Kim, C., and Moser. D. (1996), Fairness in Ultimatum Garnes with Asymmetric Information and Asymmetric Payoffs, Games and Economic Behavior, 13, 100-110   DOI   ScienceOn
3 Burnell, S. J., Evans, L., and Yao, S. (1999). The Ultimatum Game: Optimal Strategies without Fairness, Games and economic behavior, 26(2), 221-252   DOI   ScienceOn
4 Thaler, R. H. (1988), Anomalies: The ultimatum game, Journal of Economic Perspectives, 2, 195-206   DOI   ScienceOn
5 Takadama, K., Suematsu, Y. L., Sugimoto, N., Nawa, N. E., and Shimohara, K. (2003), Towards Verification and Validation in Multiagent-Based Systems and Simulations: Analyzing Different Learning Bargaining Agents, The 4th Workshop on Multi-Agent Based Simulation, 18-32
6 Nakayama, M. (2000), E-commerce and firm bargaining power shift in grocery marketing channels: A case of wholesalers' structured document exchanges, Journal of information technology(JIT), 15(3), 195-210   DOI   ScienceOn
7 Van Bragt, D. D. B. and La Poutre, J. A. (2002), Co-evolving automata negotiate with a variety of opponents, Proceedings of the 2002 Congress on Evolutionary Computation, 2, 1426-1431
8 Rubinstein, A. (1982), Perfect equilibria in a bargaining model, Econometrica, 50, 97-109   DOI   ScienceOn
9 Stanley, T. D. and Tran, U. (1998), Economics Students Need Not Be Greedy: Fairness and the Ultimatum Game, The Journal of socia-economics, 27(6), 657-664   DOI   ScienceOn
10 David J. Cooper, Nick Feltovich, Alvin E. Roth, and Rami Zwick (2003), Relative versus Absolute Speed of Adjustment in Strategic Environments ; Responder Behavior in Ultimatum Games, Experimental economics, a journal of the Economic Science Association, 6(2), 181-207   DOI   ScienceOn
11 Suleiman, R. (1996), Expectations and fairness in a modified Ultimatum game, Journal of economic psychology, 17(5), 531-554   DOI   ScienceOn
12 Grosskopf, Brit (2003), Reinforcement and Directional Learning in the Ultimatum Game with Responder Competition, Experimental economics, a journal of the Economic Science Association, 6(2), 141-158   DOI   ScienceOn
13 Roth, A. and Erev, I. (1995), Learning in Extensive Form Games: Experimental Data and Simple Dynamic Models in the Intermediate Term, Games and Economics Behavior, 8, 164-212   DOI   ScienceOn
14 Marwin, S., Szapiro.T., and Haigh, K. (1991), Genetic algorithms approach to a negotiation support system, IEEE Trans. Systems, Man and Cybernetics, 21, Issue 1, 102-114   DOI   ScienceOn
15 Page, K. M., Nowak, M. A., and Sigmund, K. (2000), The spatial ultimatum game, Proceedings, Biological sciences, 267(1458), 2177-2182
16 Zhong, Fang, Kimbrough, Steven O., and Wu, D. J. (2002), Cooperative agent systems: artificial agents play the ultimatum game, Proceedings of the 35th Annual Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences, 2169-2177
17 Chang, Soek-Cheol, Yun, Joung-Il, Lee, Ju-Sang, Lee, Sang-Uk, Mahalik, N. P., and Ann, Byung-Ha (2005), Analysis on the Parameters of the Evolving Artificial Agents in Sequential Bargaining Game, The special issue on Software Agent and its Applications, IEICE, E88-D(9), Sept
18 Stahl, I. (1971), Bargaining Theory, Stockholm, Stockholm School of Economics
19 Omoto, T., Kobayashi, K., and Onishi, M. (2002), Bargaining model of construction dispute resolution, IEEE International Conference on Systems, Man and Cybernetics, 7, 7-12