Papers
Topics
Authors
Recent
Gemini 2.5 Flash
Gemini 2.5 Flash
119 tokens/sec
GPT-4o
56 tokens/sec
Gemini 2.5 Pro Pro
43 tokens/sec
o3 Pro
6 tokens/sec
GPT-4.1 Pro
47 tokens/sec
DeepSeek R1 via Azure Pro
28 tokens/sec
2000 character limit reached

Negotiating Socially Optimal Allocations of Resources (1109.6340v1)

Published 28 Sep 2011 in cs.MA

Abstract: A multiagent system may be thought of as an artificial society of autonomous software agents and we can apply concepts borrowed from welfare economics and social choice theory to assess the social welfare of such an agent society. In this paper, we study an abstract negotiation framework where agents can agree on multilateral deals to exchange bundles of indivisible resources. We then analyse how these deals affect social welfare for different instances of the basic framework and different interpretations of the concept of social welfare itself. In particular, we show how certain classes of deals are both sufficient and necessary to guarantee that a socially optimal allocation of resources will be reached eventually.

User Edit Pencil Streamline Icon: https://streamlinehq.com
Authors (4)
  1. U. Endriss (2 papers)
  2. N. Maudet (3 papers)
  3. F. Sadri (2 papers)
  4. F. Toni (2 papers)
Citations (170)

Summary

Negotiating Socially Optimal Allocations of Resources: A Formal Analysis

The paper of resource allocation in multiagent systems, as presented by Endriss, Maudet, Sadri, and Toni, extends the application of social welfare concepts from welfare economics and social choice theory into the field of artificial societies formed by autonomous software agents. This paper develops an abstract negotiation framework wherein these agents can agree on multilateral deals to redistribute indivisible resources, and evaluates the effects of these redistributions on social welfare under various interpretations.

The primary focus of the research is an exploration of different social welfare orderings—utilitarian, egalitarian, and others such as Pareto efficiency and Lorenz optimality—and their implications in the context of artificial agent societies. The paper addresses systems where agents are self-interested but evaluates the outcomes from a broader societal perspective.

Key Themes

  1. Framework for Negotiation: The paper presents a foundational framework where agents exchange bundles of resources through what are termed "deals". The framework is flexible, allowing for a wide range of constraints on deals—in terms of both their structure and the agents' criteria for accepting them.
  2. Social Welfare Metrics: Various social welfare metrics are considered:
    • Utilitarian Welfare: Measures collective welfare as the sum of individual utilities. The paper shows that with monetary side payments, this leads to allocations with maximal welfare.
    • Egalitarian Welfare: Focuses on improving the welfare of the weakest agent. Agents negotiate to increase the minimum utility, and the framework supports convergence to an optimal allocation in this sense.
    • Pareto Efficiency: Ensures no agent can be made better off without making another worse off, achieved without monetary transfers but with cooperatively rational deals.
  3. Deal Complexity and Convergence: The research outlines conditions under which negotiation will lead to socially optimal allocations:
    • With side payments, maximal utilitarian welfare can be achieved.
    • Without side payments, Pareto optimal allocations can still be reached using cooperatively rational criteria.
    • The necessity of complex, non-decomposable deals is emphasized across scenarios, a significant theoretical insight for designing distributed negotiation protocols.
  4. Implications for Multiagent Systems: The authors explore agent designs that encapsulate various principles of social welfare, emphasizing the alignment of protocol design with desired societal outcomes, termed as "welfare engineering."
  5. Special Scenarios and Simplifications: In specific domains like those with monotonic or dichotomous preferences, simpler forms of negotiation (e.g., 1-deals) suffice to achieve optimal social welfare metrics. This offers practical guidance on system design under constraint conditions.

Conclusions and Future Directions

While the theoretical results highlight the feasibility of designing agent systems that autonomously negotiate socially desirable outcomes, the complexity of aligning local agent behaviors with global societal goals is non-trivial. The necessity for multilateral and structurally complex deals underscores the need for sophisticated protocols capable of achieving convergence efficiently. The discussion on welfare engineering provides a compelling conceptual toolkit for tailoring multiagent system designs to specific application contexts.

Future research might explore communication complexity and computational constraints to propose more viable distributed mechanisms that approach the ideal allocations rapidly. Moreover, integrating emerging techniques in machine learning and AI planning with these negotiation frameworks could lead to more adaptive and intelligent agent societies.

In conclusion, this paper provides a rigorous formal basis for understanding how social welfare concepts from communal human contexts could be applied, adapted, and optimized within artificial agent ecosystems, presenting both challenges and opportunities for advancing rational, coherent, and socially attentive multiagent systems.