IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/jas/jasssj/2006-18-2.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Construction and Evaluation of Social Agents in Hybrid Settings: Approach and Experimental Results of the INKA Project

Author

Abstract

We present an integrated approach to the modelling, implementation and examination of social agents as consecutive steps in an interdisciplinary research process. The multi-agent system developed is inspired by sociological role concepts to provide agents with the capability to negotiate on the basis of social expectations. The overall goal of our system is to allow direct interaction between agents and humans. In order to examine these hybrid constellations we developed an experimental approach, termed 'Interactivity Experiment'. An initial experiment showed that human settings, agent settings and mixed settings produce very different results, and that heterogeneous settings are superior to homogeneous settings.

Suggested Citation

  • Martin Meister & Kay Schröter & Diemo Urbig & Eric Lettkemann & Hans-Dieter Burkhard & Werner Rammert, 2007. "Construction and Evaluation of Social Agents in Hybrid Settings: Approach and Experimental Results of the INKA Project," Journal of Artificial Societies and Social Simulation, Journal of Artificial Societies and Social Simulation, vol. 10(1), pages 1-4.
    • Handle: RePEc:jas:jasssj:2006-18-2
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.jasss.org/10/1/4/4.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Ana Maria Ramanath & Nigel Gilbert, 2004. "The Design of Participatory Agent-Based Social Simulations," Journal of Artificial Societies and Social Simulation, Journal of Artificial Societies and Social Simulation, vol. 7(4), pages 1-1.
    2. N.R. Jennings & P. Faratin & A.R. Lomuscio & S. Parsons & M.J. Wooldridge & C. Sierra, 2001. "Automated Negotiation: Prospects, Methods and Challenges," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 10(2), pages 199-215, March.
    3. Matthias Nickles & Michael Rovatsos & Marco Schmitt & Wilfried Brauer & Felix Fischer & Thomas Malsch & Kai Paetow & Gerhard Weiss, 2007. "The Empirical Semantics Approach to Communication Structure Learning and Usage: Individualistic Vs. Systemic Views," Journal of Artificial Societies and Social Simulation, Journal of Artificial Societies and Social Simulation, vol. 10(1), pages 1-5.
    4. Olivier Barreteau & François Bousquet & Jean-Marie Attonaty, 2001. "Role-Playing Games for Opening the Black Box of Multi-Agent Systems: Method and Lessons of Its Application to Senegal River Valley Irrigated Systems," Journal of Artificial Societies and Social Simulation, Journal of Artificial Societies and Social Simulation, vol. 4(2), pages 1-5.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Alexandra S Penn & Christopher J K Knight & David J B Lloyd & Daniele Avitabile & Kasper Kok & Frank Schiller & Amy Woodward & Angela Druckman & Lauren Basson, 2013. "Participatory Development and Analysis of a Fuzzy Cognitive Map of the Establishment of a Bio-Based Economy in the Humber Region," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 8(11), pages 1-14, November.
    2. Moojen, Fernanda Gomes & Ryschawy, Julie & dos Santos, Davi Teixeira & Barth Neto, Armindo & Vieira, Paulo Cardozo & Portella, Elisa & de Faccio Carvalho, Paulo César, 2022. "The farm coaching experience to support the transition to integrated crop–livestock systems: From gaming to action," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 196(C).
    3. Melvin F. Shakun, 2005. "Multi-bilateral Multi-issue E-negotiation in E-commerce with a Tit-for-Tat Computer Agent," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 14(5), pages 383-392, September.
    4. Katarzyna Ostasiewicz & Michal H. Tyc & Piotr Goliczewski & Piotr Magnuszewski & Andrzej Radosz & Jan Sendzimir, 2006. "Integrating economic and psychological insights in binary choice models with social interactions," Papers physics/0609170, arXiv.org.
    5. Sigifredo Laengle & Nikunja Mohan Modak & Jose M. Merigo & Gustavo Zurita, 2018. "Twenty-Five Years of Group Decision and Negotiation: A Bibliometric Overview," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 27(4), pages 505-542, August.
    6. Huiye Ma & Nicole Ronald & Theo Arentze & Harry Timmermans, 2013. "Negotiating on location, timing, duration, and participant in agent-mediated joint activity-travel scheduling," Journal of Geographical Systems, Springer, vol. 15(4), pages 427-451, October.
    7. Rudolf Vetschera & Michael Filzmoser & Ronald Mitterhofer, 2014. "An Analytical Approach to Offer Generation in Concession-Based Negotiation Processes," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 23(1), pages 71-99, January.
    8. Franziska Appel & Alfons Balmann, 2023. "Predator or prey? Effects of farm growth on neighbouring farms," Journal of Agricultural Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 74(1), pages 214-236, February.
    9. Alessio R. Lomuscio & Michael Wooldridge & Nicholas R. Jennings, 2003. "A Classification Scheme for Negotiation in Electronic Commerce," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 12(1), pages 31-56, January.
    10. Falk, Thomas & Kumar, Shalander & Srigiri, Srinivasa, 2019. "Experimental games for developing institutional capacity to manage common water infrastructure in India," Agricultural Water Management, Elsevier, vol. 221(C), pages 260-269.
    11. García-Barrios, L.E. & Speelman, E.N. & Pimm, M.S., 2008. "An educational simulation tool for negotiating sustainable natural resource management strategies among stakeholders with conflicting interests," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 210(1), pages 115-126.
    12. Minh Nguyen-Duc & Alexis Drogoul, 2007. "Using Computational Agents to Design Participatory Social Simulations," Journal of Artificial Societies and Social Simulation, Journal of Artificial Societies and Social Simulation, vol. 10(4), pages 1-5.
    13. Jorge E. Hernández & Josefa Mula & Raúl Poler & Andrew C. Lyons, 2014. "Collaborative Planning in Multi-tier Supply Chains Supported by a Negotiation-Based Mechanism and Multi-agent System," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 23(2), pages 235-269, March.
    14. Jain, Vipul & Deshmukh, S.G., 2009. "Dynamic supply chain modeling using a new fuzzy hybrid negotiation mechanism," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 122(1), pages 319-328, November.
    15. J. Gareth Polhill & Lee-Ann Sutherland & Nicholas M. Gotts, 2010. "Using Qualitative Evidence to Enhance an Agent-Based Modelling System for Studying Land Use Change," Journal of Artificial Societies and Social Simulation, Journal of Artificial Societies and Social Simulation, vol. 13(2), pages 1-10.
    16. Balmann, Alfons & Happe, Kathrin, 2001. "Agentenbasierte Politik- und Sektoranalyse - Perspektiven und Herausforderungen," German Journal of Agricultural Economics, Humboldt-Universitaet zu Berlin, Department for Agricultural Economics, vol. 50(08), pages 1-12.
    17. Joffre, Olivier M. & Bosma, Roel H. & Ligtenberg, Arend & Tri, Van Pham Dang & Ha, Tran Thi Phung & Bregt, Arnold K., 2015. "Combining participatory approaches and an agent-based model for better planning shrimp aquaculture," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 141(C), pages 149-159.
    18. Beaudoin, D. & Frayret, J.-M. & LeBel, L., 2010. "Negotiation-based distributed wood procurement planning within a multi-firm environment," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 12(2), pages 79-93, February.
    19. Diana Adamatti & Jaime Simão Sichman & Helder Coelho, 2009. "An Analysis of the Insertion of Virtual Players in GMABS Methodology Using the Vip-JogoMan Prototype," Journal of Artificial Societies and Social Simulation, Journal of Artificial Societies and Social Simulation, vol. 12(3), pages 1-7.
    20. John Zeleznikow, 2021. "Using Artificial Intelligence to provide Intelligent Dispute Resolution Support," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 30(4), pages 789-812, August.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:jas:jasssj:2006-18-2. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Francesco Renzini (email available below). General contact details of provider: .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.