Trust and matching algorithms for selecting suitable agents

Abstract

This article addresses the problem of finding suitable agents to collaborate with for a given interaction in distributed open systems, such as multiagent and P2P systems. The agent in question is given the chance to describe its confidence in its own capabilities. However, since agents may be malicious, misinformed, suffer from miscommunication, and so on, one also needs to calculate how much trusted is that agent. This article proposes a novel trust model that calculates the expectation about an agent's future performance in a given context by assessing both the agent's willingness and capability through the semantic comparison of the current context in question with the agent's performance in past similar experiences. The proposed mechanism for assessing trust may be applied to any real world application where past commitments are recorded and observations are made that assess these commitments, and the model can then calculate one's trust in another with respect to a future commitment by assessing the other's past performance.

References

1. Abdul-Rahman, A. and Hailes, S. 2000. Supporting trust in virtual communities. In Proceedings of the 33rd Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences (HICSS'00). IEEE, 6007.
2. Arcos, J. L., Esteva, M., Noriega, P., Rodríguez-Aguilar, J. A., and Sierra, C. 2005. Engineering open environments with electronic institutions. Eng. Appl. Artif. Intell. 18, 191--204.
3. Bizer, C., Heese, R., Mochol, M., Oldakowski, R., Tolksdorf, R., and Eckstein, R. 2005. The impact of semantic web technologies on job recruitment processes. In Wirtschaftsinformatik 2005. O. K. Ferstl, E. J. Sinz, S. Eckert, and T. Isselhorst, Eds., Physica-Verlag HD, Berlin, 1367--1381.
4. Carbo, J., Molina, J., and Davila, J. 2003. Trust management through fuzzy reputation. Int. J. Coop. Inf. Syst. 12, 1, 135--155.
5. Castelfranchi, C. and Falcone, R. 1998. Principles of trust for mas: Cognitive anatomy, social importance, and quantification. In Proceedings of the 3rd International Conference on Multi Agent Systems (ICMAS'98). IEEE, 72.
6. Castelfranchi, C. and Falcone, R. 2000. Trust is much more than subjective probability: Mental components and sources of trust. In Proceedings of the 33rd Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences (HICSS'00). IEEE, 6008.
7. Castelfranchi, C. and Falcone, R. 2001. Social trust: A cognitive approach. In Trust and Deception in Virtual Societies, 55--90.
8. De Pinninck, A. P., Sierra, C., et al. 2008. Summative report on bioinformatics case studies. Project Deliverable D6.4, The OpenKnowledge project. http://www.cisa.inf.ed.ac.uk/OK/Deliverables/D6.4.pdf.
9. Debenham, J. and Sierra, C. 2009. An agent supports constructivist and ecological rationality. In Proceedings of the IEEE/WIC/ACM International Joint Conference on Web Intelligence and Intelligent Agent Technology (WI-IAT'09). R. Baeza-Yates, J. Lang, S. Mitra, and Simon, Eds., IEEE, 255--258.
10. Dondio, P. and Barrett, S. 2007. Presumptive selection of trust evidence. In Proceedings of the 6th International Joint Conference on Autonomous Agents and Multiagent Systems (AAMAS'07). ACM, New York, 166:1--166:8.
11. Fabregues, A., Madrenas-Ciurana, J., Sierra, C., and Debenham, J. 2009. Supplier performance in a digital ecosystem. In Proceedings of the IEEE International Conference on Digital Ecosystems and Technologies (IEEE-DEST'09). 466--471.
12. Giunchiglia, F. and Shvaiko, P. 2003. Semantic matching. Knowledge Eng. Rev. 18, 3, 265--280.
13. Giunchiglia, F. and Walsh, T. 1992. A theory of abstraction. Artif. Intell. 57, 323--389.
14. Giunchiglia, F., McNeill, F., Yatskevich, M., Pane, J., Besana, P., and Shvaiko, P. 2008a. Approximate structure-preserving semantic matching. In Proceedings of the 7th International Conference on Ontologies, Databases and Applications of Semantics (ODBASE'08). Springer.
15. Giunchiglia, F., Sierra, C., Mcneill, F., Osman, N., and Siebes, R. 2008b. Deliverable 4.5: Good enough answers algorithm. Tech. rep., OpenKnowledge Project.
16. Lamanna, D. D., Skene, J., and Emmerich, W. 2003. Slang: A language for defining service level agreements. In Proceedings of the 9th IEEE Workshop on Future Trends of Distributed Computing Systems (FTDCS'03). IEEE, 100.
17. Li, Y., Bandar, Z. A., and McLean, D. 2003. An approach for measuring semantic similarity between words using multiple information sources. IEEE Trans. Knowl. Data Eng. 15, 871--882.
18. Marsh, S. 1994. Formalising trust as a computational concept. Ph.D. thesis, Department of Mathematics and Computer Science, University of Stirling.
19. Osman, N. and Robertson, D. 2007. Dynamic verification of trust in distributed open systems. In Proceedings of the 20th International Joint Conference on Artifical Intelligence. Morgan Kaufmann Publishers Inc., San Francisco, CA, 1440--1445.
20. Pane, J., Sierra, C., Trecarichi, G., Marchese, M., Besana, P., and McNeill, F. 2008. Summative report on gea, trust and reputation: Integration and evaluation results. Project Deliverable D4.9, The OpenKnowledge project. http://www.cisa.inf.ed.ac.uk/OK/Deliverables/D4.9.pdf.
21. Pinyol, I., Sabater-Mir, J., and Cuní, G. 2007. How to talk about reputation using a common ontology: From definition to implementation. In Proceedings of the 9th Workshop on Trust in Agent Societies. 90--101.
22. Pitt 2007. The Pitt Review: Lessons Learned from the 2007 Floods. HMSO, London.
23. Ramchurn, S. D., Huynh, D., and Jennings, N. R. 2004b. Trust in multi-agent systems. Knowl. Eng. Rev. 19, 1--25.
24. Ramchurn, S., Sierra, C., Godo, L., and Jennings, N. R. 2004a. Devising a trust model for multiagent interactions using confidence and reputation. Int. J. Appl. Artif. Intell. 18, 9--10, 833--852.
25. Rehak, M., Gregor, M., Pechoucek, M., and Bradshaw, J. M. 2006. Representing context for multiagent trust modeling. In Proceedings of the IEEE/WIC/ACM international conference on Intelligent Agent Technology (IAT'06). IEEE, 737--746.
26. Robertson, D. 2005. A lightweight coordination calculus for agent systems. In Declarative Agent Languages and Technologies II, J. A. Leite, A. Omicini, P. Torroni, and P. Yolum, Eds., Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol. 3476, Springer, 183--197.
27. Rubner, Y., Tomasi, C., and Guibas, L. J. 1998. A metric for distributions with applications to image databases. In Proceedings of the 6th International Conference on Computer Vision (ICCV'98). IEEE, 59.
28. Sabater, J. and Sierra, C. 2002. Reputation and social network analysis in multi-agent systems. In Proceedings of the 1st International Joint Conference on Autonomous Agents and Multiagent Systems (AAMAS'02). ACM, New York, 475--482.
29. Sabater, J. and Sierra, C. 2005. Review on computational trust and reputation models. Artif. Intell. Rev. 24, 1, 33--60.
30. Schillo, M., Funk, P., and Rovatsos, M. 2000. Using trust for detecting deceitful agents in artificial societies. Appl. Artif. Intell. 14, 8, 825--848.
31. Sensoy, M. and Yolum, P. 2006. A context-aware approach for service selection using ontologies. In Proceedings of the 5th International Joint Conference on Autonomous Agents and Multiagent Systems (AAMAS'06). ACM, New York, 931--938.
32. Sierra, C. and Debenham, J. 2006. Trust and honour in information-based agency. In Proceedings of the 5th International Joint Conference On Autonomous Agents and Multiagent Systems (AAMAS'06). ACM, New York, 1225--1232.
33. Sierra, C. and Debenham, J. K. 2007. Information-based agency. In Proceedings of the 20th International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence (IJCAI'07). M. M. Veloso, Ed., 1513--1518.
34. Simari, G. I., Broecheler, M., Subrahmanian, V. S., and Kraus, S. 2008. Promises kept, promises broken: An axiomatic and quantitative treatment of fulfillment. In Principles of Knowledge Representation and Reasoning: Proceedings of the 11th International Conference, G. Brewka and J. Lang, Eds., AAAI Press, 59--69.
35. Tai, K.-C. 1979. The tree-to-tree correction problem. J. ACM 26, 422--433.
36. Teacy, W. T. L., Patel, J., Jennings, N. R., and Luck, M. 2006. Travos: Trust and reputation in the context of inaccurate information sources. Auton. Agents Multi-Agent Syst. 12, 2, 183--198.

Index Terms

• Computing methodologies

  • Artificial intelligence

    • Distributed artificial intelligence

      • Multi-agent systems