Galit Haim, Ya'akov Gal, Sarit Kraus and Michele J. Gelfand A Cultural Sensitive Agent for Human-Computer Negotiation 1.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
TWO STEP EQUATIONS 1. SOLVE FOR X 2. DO THE ADDITION STEP FIRST
Advertisements

Requirements Engineering Processes – 2
Chapter 5 Transfer of Training
Computer Networks TCP/IP Protocol Suite.
Artificial Intelligence: Knowledge Representation
Kapitel 21 Astronomie Autor: Bennett et al. Galaxienentwicklung Kapitel 21 Galaxienentwicklung © Pearson Studium 2010 Folie: 1.
Chapter 12 Understanding Work Teams
Objectives Know why companies use distribution channels and understand the functions that these channels perform. Learn how channel members interact and.
1 Copyright © 2010, Elsevier Inc. All rights Reserved Fig 2.1 Chapter 2.
By D. Fisher Geometric Transformations. Reflection, Rotation, or Translation 1.
Document #07-12G 1 RXQ Customer Enrollment Using a Registration Agent Process Flow Diagram (Switch) Customer Supplier Customer authorizes Enrollment.
Document #07-12G 1 RXQ Customer Enrollment Using a Registration Agent Process Flow Diagram (Switch) Customer Supplier Customer authorizes Enrollment.
Business Transaction Management Software for Application Coordination 1 Business Processes and Coordination.
and 6.855J Cycle Canceling Algorithm. 2 A minimum cost flow problem , $4 20, $1 20, $2 25, $2 25, $5 20, $6 30, $
Actively Transfer Domain Knowledge Xiaoxiao Shi Wei Fan Jiangtao Ren Sun Yat-sen University IBM T. J. Watson Research Center Transfer when you can, otherwise.
We need a common denominator to add these fractions.
Human Performance Improvement Process
Jeopardy Q 1 Q 6 Q 11 Q 16 Q 21 Q 2 Q 7 Q 12 Q 17 Q 22 Q 3 Q 8 Q 13
Jeopardy Q 1 Q 6 Q 11 Q 16 Q 21 Q 2 Q 7 Q 12 Q 17 Q 22 Q 3 Q 8 Q 13
Title Subtitle.
0 - 0.
ALGEBRAIC EXPRESSIONS
DIVIDING INTEGERS 1. IF THE SIGNS ARE THE SAME THE ANSWER IS POSITIVE 2. IF THE SIGNS ARE DIFFERENT THE ANSWER IS NEGATIVE.
ADDING INTEGERS 1. POS. + POS. = POS. 2. NEG. + NEG. = NEG. 3. POS. + NEG. OR NEG. + POS. SUBTRACT TAKE SIGN OF BIGGER ABSOLUTE VALUE.
SUBTRACTING INTEGERS 1. CHANGE THE SUBTRACTION SIGN TO ADDITION
MULT. INTEGERS 1. IF THE SIGNS ARE THE SAME THE ANSWER IS POSITIVE 2. IF THE SIGNS ARE DIFFERENT THE ANSWER IS NEGATIVE.
Addition Facts
Year 6 mental test 5 second questions
Concepts of Game Theory I
Evaluating Provider Reliability in Risk-aware Grid Brokering Iain Gourlay.
ZMQS ZMQS
Economic games on the internet: the effect of $1 stakes Ofra Amir, David G. Rand and Yaakov (Kobi) Gal.
Copyright ©2010 Pearson Education, Inc. publishing as Prentice Hall
Empirical Studies in Computer-Mediated Interest-Based Negotiations Sohan Dsouza MSc IT, 2009 British University in Dubai.
© Richard A. Medeiros 2004 x y Function Machine Function Machine next.
ABC Technology Project
© S Haughton more than 3?
Knowledge requirements for rolling stock maintenance TU Eindhoven – 19th of June 2007 by Bob Huisman NedTrain - Fleet Management.
IONA Technologies Position Paper Constraints and Capabilities for Web Services
1 CS 391L: Machine Learning: Rule Learning Raymond J. Mooney University of Texas at Austin.
Squares and Square Root WALK. Solve each problem REVIEW:
Machine Learning: Intro and Supervised Classification
The x- and y-Intercepts
Lecture 5: Requirements Engineering
Reaching Agreements II. 2 What utility does a deal give an agent? Given encounter  T 1,T 2  in task domain  T,{1,2},c  We define the utility of a.
Chapter 5 Test Review Sections 5-1 through 5-4.
Virginia Birch MFNERC Numeracy Specialist
Addition 1’s to 20.
25 seconds left…...
Test B, 100 Subtraction Facts
Week 1.
We will resume in: 25 Minutes.
1 Unit 1 Kinematics Chapter 1 Day
How Cells Obtain Energy from Food
14-1 © Prentice Hall, 2004 Chapter 14: OOSAD Implementation and Operation (Adapted) Object-Oriented Systems Analysis and Design Joey F. George, Dinesh.
Copyright © 2010, 2007, 2004 Pearson Education, Inc. Chapter 14 From Randomness to Probability.
Excel Lesson 16 Protecting, Tracking, and Sharing Workbooks Microsoft Office 2010 Advanced Cable / Morrison 1.
1 A Systematic Review of Cross- vs. Within-Company Cost Estimation Studies Barbara Kitchenham Emilia Mendes Guilherme Travassos.
Improving System Safety through Agent-Supported User/System Interfaces: Effects of Operator Behavior Model Charles SANTONI & Jean-Marc MERCANTINI (LSIS)
DATA TRACKING AND EVALUATION 1. Goal of the STEP program: To increase the number of STEM graduates within the five-year period of the grant. You have.
1
1 * Culture sensitive agent – takes the culture of the other agent into consideration when making decisions.
Sarit Kraus Bar-Ilan University
Sarit Kraus Bar-Ilan University
1
A Study of Computational and Human Strategies in Revelation Games 1 Noam Peled, 2 Kobi Gal, 1 Sarit Kraus 1 Bar-Ilan university, Israel. 2 Ben-Gurion university,
Coalition Formation between Self-Interested Heterogeneous Actors Arlette van Wissen Bart Kamphorst Virginia DignumKobi Gal.
Team Formation between Heterogeneous Actors Arlette van Wissen Virginia Dignum Kobi Gal Bart Kamphorst.
Automated Agents that Interact Proficiently with People Sarit Kraus Bar-Ilan University
Human-Computer Negotiation in Three-Player Market Settings
Presentation transcript:

Galit Haim, Ya'akov Gal, Sarit Kraus and Michele J. Gelfand A Cultural Sensitive Agent for Human-Computer Negotiation 1

Motivation Buyers and seller across geographical and ethnic borders – electronic commerce: – crowd-sourcing: – deal-of-the-day applications: Interaction between people from different countries to succeed, an agent needs to reason about how culture affects people's decision making 2

3 Goals and Challenges Can we build an agent that will negotiate better than the people in each countries? Can we build proficient negotiator with no expert designed rules? Culture sensitive agent? The approach 1. Collect data on each country 2. Use machine learning 3. Build influence diagram Sparse Data Noisy Data

The Colored Trails (CT) Game An infrastructure for agent design, implementation and evaluation for open environments Designed in 2004 by Barbara Grosz and Sarit Kraus (Grosz et al AIJ 2010) 4 CT is the right test-bed to use because it provides a task analogy to the real world

The CT Configuration 7*5 board of colored squares One square is the goal Set of colored chips Move using a chip in the same color 55

CT Scenario 2 players Multiple phases : – communication: negotiation (alternating offer protocol) – transfer: chip exchange – movement Complete information Agreements are not enforceable Complex dependencies Game ends when one of the players : reached the goal or did not move for three movement phases 6

Scoring and Payment 100 point bonus for getting to goal 5 point bonus for each chip left at end of game 10 point penalty for each square in the shortest path from end-position to goal Performance does not depend on outcome for other player 7

Personality, Adaptive Learning (PAL) Agent 8 Human behavior model Take action 8 machine learning Decision Making Data from specific country

Learning People's Reliability Predict if the other player will keep its promise 9

Learning how People Accept Offers 10 Accept or reject the proposal?

Feature Set Domain independent feature: – Current and Resulting scores – Offer generosity – Reliability: between 0 (completely unreliable) to 1(fully reliable) – Weighted reliability: over the previous rounds in the game Domain dependent feature: – Round number 11

How to Model People's Behavior For each culture: – Use different features – Choose learning algorithm that minimized error using 10-fold cross validation In US and Israel - we only used domain independent features In Lebanon we added domain dependent features 12

Data Collection with Sparse Data Sources of data to train our classifiers: – 222 game instances consisting of people playing a rule-based agent – U.S. and Israel: collect 112 game instances of people playing other people – Lebanon: collect 64 additional games Nasty agent: less reliable when fulfilling its agreement 13 The Lebanon people in this data set almost always kept the agreements and as a result, PAL never kept agreements

People Learned Reliability 14

Experiment Design 3 countries: 157 people – Israel: 63 – Lebanon: 48 – U.S.A: minutes tutorial Boards varied dependencies between players People were always the first proposer in the game There was a single path to the goal 15

Decision Making There are 3 decisions that PAL needs to make: Reliability: determine the PAL transfer strategy Accepting an offer: accept or reject a specific offer proposed by the opponent Propose an offer 16 Use backward induction over two rounds…

Success Rate: Getting to the Goal 17

Performance Comparison: Averages 18

Example in Lebanon 2 chips for 2 chips; accepted both sent 1 chip for 1 chip; accepted PAL learned that people in Lebanon were highly reliable PAL did not send, the human sent 19 games were relatively shorter people were very reliable in the training games

Example in Israel 2 chips for 2 chips; accepted only PAL sent 1 chip for 1 chip; accepted the human only sent 1 chip for 1 chip; accepted only PAL sent 1 chip for 3 chips; accepted only the human sent 20 games were relatively longer people were less reliable in the training games than in Lebanon

Conclusions PAL is able to learn to negotiate proficiently with people across different cultures PAL was able to outperform people in all dependency conditions and in all countries 21 This is the first work to show that a computer agent can learn to negotiate with people in different countries

Colored trails is easy to use for your own research Open source empirical test-bed for investigating decision making Easy to design new games Built in functionality for conducting experiments with people Over 30 publications Freely available; extensive documentation (or Google colored trails) THANK 22