skip to main content
article
Free Access

A formal study of distributed meeting scheduling: preliminary results

Authors Info & Claims
Published:01 October 1991Publication History
First page image

References

  1. 1 Thomas L. Casavant and Jon G. Kuhl. A communicating finite automata approach to modeling distributed computation and its apphcation to distributed decision-making. IEEE Transactions on Computers, C- 39(5), M~y 1990. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  2. 2 S. E. Conry, K. Kuwabara, V. R. Lesser, and R. A. Meyer. Multistage negotiation for distributed constraint satisfaction, iEEE Transactions on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics, 21(6), December 1991. (Special Issue on Distributed AI).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  3. 3 Susan E. Conry, Robert A. Meyer, and Victor R. Lesser. Multistage negotiation in distributed planning. In Alan H. Bond and Les Gasser, editors, Readings in Distributed Artificial Intelligence, pages 367-384. Morgan Kaufman, 1988. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  4. 4 Edmund H. Durfee, Victor R. Lesser, and D~niel D. Gorkill. Trends in cooperative distributed problem solving. IEEE Transactions on Knowledge and Data Engineering, 1(1):63-83, March 1989. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  5. 5 Edmund H. Durfee and Thomas A. Montgomery. A hierarchical protocol for coordinating multiagent behaviors. In Proceedings of the National Conference on Artificial intelligence, pages 86-93, July 1990.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  6. 6 Edmund H. Durfee and Thomas A. Montgomery. Coordination as distributed search in a hierarchical behavior space. IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics, 21(6), December 1991. (Special Issue on Distributed AI).Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  7. 7 M. Feldman. Electronic mail and weak ties in organizations. Office Technology and People, 3, 1987. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  8. 8 Irene Greif. PCAL: A personal calendar. Technical Report TM-213, MIT Laboratory for Computer Science, Cambridge, Mass, 1982.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  9. 9 Jonathan Grudin. Social evaluation of the user interface: Who does the work and who gets the benefit? In H. Bullinger and B. Shacketl, editors, Human Computer Interaction- INTERA CT87. North Holland, 1987.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  10. 10 Carl Hewitt and Jeff Inman. DAI betwixt and between: From "intelligent agents" to open systems science. IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics, 21(6), December 1991. (Special Issue on Distributed AI).Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  11. 11 J. F. Kelley and A. Chapanis. How professional persons keep their calendars' Implications for computerization. Journal of Occupational Psychology, 55:141-156, 1982.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  12. 12 C. Kincaid, P. Dupont, and A. Kaye. Electronic calendars in the office: An assessment of user needs and current technology. A CM Transactions on Office Information Systems, 3(1):89-102, January 1985. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  13. 13 Thomas W. Malone, Kenneth R. Grant, Franklyn A. Turbak, Stephen A. Brobst, and Michael D. Cohen. Intelligent information-sharing systems. Communications of the A CM, 30(5):390-402, 1987. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  14. 14 Jeff Y-C Pan and Jay M. Tenenbaum. An intelligent agent framework for enterprise integration. IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics, 21(6), December 1991. (Special Issue on Distributed AI).Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  15. 15 Reid G. Smith. The contract net protocol: Highlevel communication and control in a distributed problem solver. IEEE Transactions on Computers, C- 29(12):1104-1113, December 1980.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  16. 16 K. Sugihara, T. Kikuno, and N. Yoshida. A meeting scheduler for office automation. IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering, 15(10), October 1989. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library

Index Terms

  1. A formal study of distributed meeting scheduling: preliminary results

            Recommendations

            Comments

            Login options

            Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.

            Sign in

            Full Access

            • Published in

              cover image ACM SIGOIS Bulletin
              ACM SIGOIS Bulletin  Volume 12, Issue 2-3
              Nov. 1991
              296 pages
              ISSN:0894-0819
              DOI:10.1145/127769
              • Editor:
              • Peter de Jong
              Issue’s Table of Contents
              • cover image ACM Conferences
                COCS '91: Proceedings of the conference on Organizational computing systems
                October 1991
                297 pages
                ISBN:0897914562
                DOI:10.1145/122831

              Copyright © 1991 ACM

              Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for components of this work owned by others than ACM must be honored. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee. Request permissions from [email protected]

              Publisher

              Association for Computing Machinery

              New York, NY, United States

              Publication History

              • Published: 1 October 1991

              Check for updates

              Qualifiers

              • article

            PDF Format

            View or Download as a PDF file.

            PDF

            eReader

            View online with eReader.

            eReader