TAC - Trading Agent Competition

TAC - Trading Agent Competition

Trading Agent Competition

E-Commerce is expected to grow drastically in the future, presenting a multi-billion market.

Auctions make a substantial part of this ever growing market.

What can an agent do that I cannot? Once auctions become more complex,

simple bidding strategies will not work anymore.


What kind of auctions are there? Simple

English auctions Dutch auctions Vickrey auctions First-price sealed-bid auctions …

Complex - Combinatorial auctions


Combinatorial Auctions

What makes combinatorial auctions so complex? Multiple auctions are grouped together forming

inseparable bundles Products can be complementary (Camera + Flash) :

V(p1,p2..pn) > V(p1), V(p2),…,V(pn) Products can be replaceable (Netscape + Explorer) :

V(p1,p2..pn) < V(p1), V(p2),…,V(pn)


Combinatorial Auctions

Do combinatorial auctions exist in real life? Spectrum frequencies for wireless

communication can be auctioned. An auction per frequency

Timeslots for airplanes takeoff and landing can be auctioned as well.


TAC - Trading Agent Competition

An academic project in the University ofMichigan led by Michele P. Wellman.

The goal:Develop best-of-breed strategies for autonomous bidding agents in combinatorial auctions.


TAC - Rules


TAC - Rules - Contd.

a travel agent, with the goal of assembling travel packages (from TACtown to Tampa, during a notional 5-day period).

Each client has his/her own preferences. maximize the total satisfaction of the clients. Travel packages consist of the following: A round-trip flight, A hotel reservation, and Tickets to some of the following entertainment events:

Alligator wrestling, Amusement park, Museum



Flights One auction per day (1-4), (2-5) sets prices according to a stochastic function x(t) = 10 + (t/12:00)*(x-10). X from [10,90], price(t) = rand[-10, x(t)]



Hotel Rooms traveler needs a hotel for every night

between arrival and departure of the flight. Two hotels (Tampa Towers, Shoreline

Shanties) – cannot switch hotel. Each hotel (1-4), (1-4) auctions off 16 room

every minute. 16th bid ascending auctions Auctions close randomly on the minute>=4



Entertainment tickets traveler can attend entertainment events

only during their vacation. An agent is allocated 12 tickets. No more than one entertainment event per

day. Entertainment events may not repeat

during the vacation. Tickets may be sold and bought freely

among agents.


Agent deliberation

What items to buy? Allocation of goods (brute force, relaxation,

genetic algorithms, linear programming) How many items to buy?

Open/close loop (few/all - using heuristics) How much to pay for each item?

Marginal value & price prediction (machine learning, neural networks, statistical analysis…)

When to buy the items? Flight tickets dilemma )few/all - using heuristics)


Winning agents - 2003 Whitebear

Empirical experiments, goods relaxation, predict prices based on previous games, low hotel bids

South Hampton TAC Heuristics and fuzzy-logic for price prediction,

Linear programming for goods allocation Thalis

Price prediction based on regression, adds its own rules (limit # hotel rooms per day…)


Winning agents - 2003 - Contd. UMBCTAC

buys all flight tickets at once, relaxation + heuristics for goods allocation, using rules

Wolverine Calculated Walrasian equilibrium in competitive

market, LP for goods allocation LivingAgent

Open loop, brute force for goods allocation, high bidder, buys all flight tickets at once


The end

http://www.sics.se/tac/

Groupware & CSCW

Groupware and Computer Supported

Cooperative Work

Groupware & CSCW

Agendao Definitionso Aspects of Groupwareo Multi-Aspect Groupwareo Social and Group Issues in Designing

Groupware Systemso Supporting Technologies and Theorieso Taxonomies of Groupwareo Groupware and Internet

Groupware & CSCW

Groupware:hardware and software technology to assist interacting groups

Computer Supported Cooperative WorkThe study of how groups work and how wecan implement technology to enhance groupinteraction and collaboration

Groupware & CSCW

Well-known Groupware examples: Fax Electronic mail Video conferencing Workflow management system: Analyzing,

coordinating and executing business processes. Groupware add-ons

Is a specific system a groupware? Depends on the system’s aspects.

Differ in time/place/group size

Groupware & CSCW

Agenda Definitions Aspects of Groupware Multi-Aspect Groupware Social and Group Issues in Designing

Groupware Systems Supporting Technologies and Theories Taxonomies of Groupware Groupware and Internet

Basic Definitions

Groupware Computing and Communications technology based systems that assist groups of participants, and help to support a shared environment.

Group• Size (2 engineers citizens of a country)• Interactions:

• Sharing goals, tasks, common knowledge or preferences• Conflicting, adversary individuals – Closely resembles

MAS.

Basic Definitions

Computer Supported Cooperative Work The research area that studies the use of computing and communications technologies to support group Interactivities

“How do people interact and collaborate?”

“How can technology facilitate and enhance this interaction and collaboration?”

Basic DefinitionsResearch methodologies: Field studies Laboratory experiments Ethnological studies System prototyping Simulation Conceptual modeling

Disciplines: Social psychology Organizational design Economics Computer science Management science

Groupware & CSCW



Aspects of Groupware

The following classification of Groupware systems is based on system functionality:

KeeperStorage and access to share data (artifact)

CoordinatorOrdering and synchronization of activities

CommunicatorUnconstrained and explicit communication

Team-agentIntelligent/Semi intelligent software components


KeeperThe collaboration of people is centered on the Access and change of a shared set of data.

Some typical keepers are: Document revision - single writer, multiple reviewers Concurrent editors Computer aided design (CAD) and computer aided

software engineering (CASE)


Keeper - Contd.

Some keepers’ functionalities are: Control access rights to the objects making up the

artifact Control of simultaneous access to the artifact Versioning of the artifact Storage of time stamp and author information on

objects of the artifact - View changes Floor control – Avoiding simultaneous access to the

artifact


Ontological ModelObjects & manipulations for constructing and manipulating the artifact; semantics and use

Concurrency Control Floor Control Locking

Currency - keeping the “view” up-to-date


Ontological Model - QuestMapQuestMap, by IBM Evolved from the experimental gIBIS system

(Graphical Issue Based Information System). Support of decision making by structuring the

discussions.

IBIS uses a three-phase process for decision making:1. Divergence: Suggesting solutions2. Convergence: minimizing the set of solutions3. Decision: Selecting the best solution


Ontological Model - QuestMap

QuestMap is a tool to support the divergence phase.


CoordinatorThe set of functionalities related to the timing and scheduling of a system

Some typical groupware with strong coordinator components are: Workflow management systems Software process management systems Meetings coordinators and group decision

support systems.


Coordinator - Contd.Focusing on the execution of a plan or sequence of activities - enacting the plan and defining the plan itself.

Enabling an activity once its preceding activities have terminated

Sending notifications to users Inspecting the current stage of the process Dynamic alteration of the process Helping participants to manage their work.


Coordination Model The coordination model has two components

• Modeling of the process• Enactment of the plan

Modeling the process An actor playing a particular role can perform a

certain activity. Multiple activities make up a procedure.


Coordination Model - Cont.

Multiple procedures may be managed at the same time. Each procedure instance is called an endeavor.

The plan is a predefined specification on how the endeavor should proceed.

The plan is compose of the activity plan, actor assignment and the temporal plan (deadlines).

The plan may be fixed or set by the user.


Coordination Model - Cont.

Enacting the plan Is the plan static or can it change at run-time? Does the system control more than one endeavor at

the same time?


CommunicatorsCommunication among components may be implicit (the data in the keeper was altered) or explicit (Actors interact with one another).

Typical groupware communicators are: E-mail Desktop conferencing systems Chat/Instant messaging systems White-boards


Conference and Conversational models

Conference model Who, how and when communication may take place

among participants. Describing what conversational moves are allowed

in the communication. In real-time communicators, the emphasis is on the

conference model - participants will manage the conversation. I.e. Video conferencing systems.


Conference and Conversational models - Cont.

Conversational model In off-line communicators, the emphasis is on the

Conversational model - the system helps the users Messages may be answered automatically - receipt

acknowledgement


Team-AgentsArtificial participants that perform specialized functions within a group settings.I.e. “Performance specialist”, “social

mediator”

Agent categories Autonomous agents Single user agents Group agents


Team-Agents - Contd.

Group Critic Some computer aided design (CAD)

systems have critics that comment or check the user’s design.

Working closely with the keeper, warning the designer of problems (The kitchen designer put the stove too close to the window…).

The agent is aware of the different actors in the system.


Team-Agents - Contd.

Appointment Scheduler A group calendaring and scheduling of

meetings. The agent has access to the actors

individual calendars, knows their preferences, and dynamically re-arrange meetings.

As a single user agent, the scheduler pro-actively tries to satisfy its user’s preferences.


Agent Models

Different autonomous agent may have different intelligence capabilities: Tally the votes in a decision meeting Compile a program Print an acceptance letter Choose a particular methodology and tool for a

meeting Plan the sequence of activities based on the goals to

achieve.


User Agent Models

User-interfaces especially designed for groupware stress the emphasis on using the computer to facilitate human interaction.Such user-interfaces may present: Views of information objects and operations Views of process and communication View of participants View of Shared context.


The ontological model described before must be presented to the user as information objects.Different users different presentation

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

First Second Thrid Fourh

East

West

North

First

Second

Third

Fourh

First: (east=20, west=30, north=45)…


Local operations need not be seen immediately by all participants.

A workflow view of the process may help users operate the system more easily. Different stages of procedures Exceptions that rise Maps of who holds which positions Who talks to whom

Displaying the participants and preferences, in various manners may help the users.


Participants information may include: Name Photo Opinion on relevant issues Participants acquaintances Status of communications technology Geographical distribution

Contextual information may be categorized: Structural - what, where data Social - group norms, metrics, history Organizational - rules of responsibilities


The Whiteboard example

The simple whiteboard Each participant has a cursor Using the cursor, a participant may draw pixels on

the canvas (the keeper) Each participant sees the composition of all the

contributions No problem of concurrent access to the same pixel The currency of each participant’s view is not

critical


The Whiteboard example - Contd.

A more elaborate whiteboard Each participant has a cursor Each cursor has a distinct color The keeper now keeps track of both pixel and color

(Each participate may have separate canvas) Each participant has its own canvas Each participant can see the changes of a

particular user – time & author stamp


The Whiteboard example - Contd.

An even more elaborate whiteboard One cursor for the entire group The keeper controls the cursor’s ownership Some kind of concurrency control mechanism is

used (floor control, timeout…) One participant may act as an overseeing manager

Groupware & CSCW

Agendao Definitionso Aspects of Groupwareo Multi-Aspect Groupwareo Social and Group Issues in Designing

Groupware Systemso Supporting Technologies and Theorieso Taxonomies of Groupwareo Groupware and Internet

Multi-Aspect Groupware

Most Groupware research done until the 90’s were single-aspect systems.

Usually the functionality of one aspect overwhelmed the ones of other aspects.

There are some exceptions: Document reviewing systems (keepers &

coordinators) The Coordinator system (communicators &

coordinators) Chautauqua workflow system (keepers,

coordinators, communicators & team-agents)


Chautauqua - Multi-Aspect System

Internet based collaboration management system

University of Colorado & University of Arts, Austria

A workflow management system, incorporating goal based reasoning, real-time interaction and flexible, human controlled dynamic changes


Chautauqua - Multi-Aspect System - Contd.

A flexible exception handling mechanism Representation of inconsistent concurrently

updated information (keeper + coordinator) Assistance for simultaneous group editing

(an integral communicator) Powerful, verifiable, dynamic change

capability (via change agents using Petri nets & graph grammar rules)

Support of access rights to users

Groupware & CSCW



Social and Group Issues in Designing Groupware Systems

Rules for single-ware, may not be appropriate for groupware systems – beware of privacy issues.

Groups meeting scheduler are not so common – not as beneficial to users.

Give the single user an incentive to use the system.

All/nothing or critical-mass characteristics. Improve users’ work, don’t harm it.

Groupware & CSCW



Supporting Technologies and Theories

Keepers, coordinators, communicators and agents can be seen in the underlining technologies in both hardware & software.

Keepers: RAID disks, CD-ROM technologies, file and database

systems, object oriented and relational database schema technology and so on…

Coordinators: Hardware interrupts, Kernel schedulers, the ATM

switch, workflow systems, GDSS, UNIX’s make software and so on…

Supporting Technologies and Theories

Communicators: Generic e-mail and video conferencing systems,

multi-cast protocols, the Ethernet, wireless and satellite transmission, ISO 7-layer protocol and many more…

Team-Agents: User-interface management systems (UIMS) and

user-interface implementation toolkits, virtual reality agents, NetEffect - a distributed server based toolkit for multi-user virtual reality worlds, and others.

Groupware & CSCW



Taxonomies of Groupware

Space/Time Matrix

Groupware systems are sometime classified as same/different space, same/different time.

However some systems reside in more than one classification: Software inspection system. One programmer Three concurrently inspecting reviewers Same/different time!

Taxonomies of Groupware

Application area

Groupware systems may also be classified according to application domain: workflow, group decision support, real-time communication, distance learning, etc.

Some applications fall within one or another aspect (Group editing - keepers, workflow systems - coordinators).

Groupware & CSCW



Groupware and Internet

Groupware systems are becoming closely related to the Internet.

User clients, also known as user software component (USC) may include all or just part of the system functionalities.

The USC may need to communicate to a server via its network software component (NSC) which acts as its communicator.

Two possible relations between the Groupware and the Internet.


Internet as Infrastructure

The internet implements the NSC. Computers connected to the Internet must

allow some functionalities (send/receive). The Groupware’s NSC is not necessary. A Groupware may implement its own NSC,

for supporting uncommon protocols. The Internet is unreliable, messages may

get lost, and is insecure.


Internet as Presumed Software

The Internet implements the USC – The WWW browser.

No need to buy/install a separate USC. A single interface. Can be used for multiple applications. Quite limited as an input device (applets

can fix this) Limited to client-server communication. HTTP is a stateless protocol (partially solved

by cookies. Severs cannot initiate communicator with

the client.

Groupware & CSCW

The end

Gerhard Weiss. Multiagent Systems

http://www.compendiuminstitute.org/tools/questmap.htm

Documents

TAC - Trading Agent Competition