Abstract
This article presents a decentralized calendar system benefiting from the use of computational trust. In our system, each user is represented by an agent in charge of the scheduling of events, either tasks or meetings. Each event is characterized by two attributes: importance and urgency. These notions are subjective: each agent has its own priorities and its own view of what is important and urgent. Timetables can be shared with other agents according to the groups of the agents, thus facilitating the scheduling of a meeting within a group. Nevertheless, timetables do not have to be shared. So we introduce trust to support this absence of information. These mechanisms use a generic trust model permitting the calculation of trust from several sources. We stress on the importance of the different sources for the emergence of trust groups. When trust is not given between all participants in a meeting, negotiation is used to find a possible date.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Preview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Castelfranchi, C., Falcone, R., Pezzulo, G.: Trust in information sources as a source for trust: a fuzzy approach. In: AAMAS 2000 and AAMAS 2002, pp. 89–96. ACM Press, New York (2003)
Covey, S.R.: The 7 Habits of Highly Effective People. Simon & Schuster (1989)
Guha, R.: Open rating systems. Technical report, Stanford University, East Lansing, Michigan (2003)
Jennings, N.R., Faratin, P., Lomuscio, A.R., Parsons, S., Sierra, C., Wooldridge, M.: Automated negotiation: prospects, methods and challenges. International Journal of Group Decision and Negotiation 10(2), 199–215 (2001)
Jonker, C.M., Treur, J.: Formal analysis of models for the dynamics of trust based on experiences. In: Garijo, F.J., Boman, M. (eds.) MAAMAW 1999. LNCS, vol. 1647, pp. 221–231. Springer, Heidelberg (1999)
Marsh, S.: Optimism and pessimism in trust. In: Ramirez, J. (ed.) Proceedings IBERAMIA 1994/CNAISE 1994. McGraw-Hill, New York (1994)
Mathieu, P., Verrons, M.-H.: A General Negotiation Model using XML. Artificial Intelligence and Simulation of Behaviour Journal (AISBJ) 1(6), 523–542 (2005)
Melaye, D., Demazeau, Y.: Bayesian dynamic trust model. In: Pěchouček, M., Petta, P., Varga, L.Z. (eds.) CEEMAS 2005. LNCS (LNAI), vol. 3690, pp. 480–489. Springer, Heidelberg (2005)
Ossowski, S.: Co-ordination in Artificial Agent Societies. LNCS (LNAI), vol. 1535. Springer, Heidelberg (1998)
Radcliffe-Brown, A.: Structure and function in primitive society. Cohen & West (1952)
Ramchurn, S.D., Huynh, D., Jennings, N.R.: Trust in multi-agent systems. The Knowledge Engineering Review 19(1) (2004)
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2006 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg
About this paper
Cite this paper
Demazeau, Y., Melaye, D., Verrons, MH. (2006). A Decentralized Calendar System Featuring Sharing, Trusting and Negotiating. In: Ali, M., Dapoigny, R. (eds) Advances in Applied Artificial Intelligence. IEA/AIE 2006. Lecture Notes in Computer Science(), vol 4031. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/11779568_79
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/11779568_79
Publisher Name: Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg
Print ISBN: 978-3-540-35453-6
Online ISBN: 978-3-540-35454-3
eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)