skip to main content
research-article

Electronic Social Capital for Self-Organising Multi-Agent Systems

Published:20 September 2017Publication History
Skip Abstract Section

Abstract

It is a recurring requirement in open systems, such as networks, distributed systems, and socio-technical systems, that a group of agents must coordinate their behaviour for the common good. In those systems—where agents are heterogeneous—unexpected behaviour can occur due to errors or malice. Agents whose practices free-ride the system can be accepted to a certain level; however, not only do they put the stability of the system at risk, but they also compromise the agents that behave according to the system’s rules.

In social systems, it has been observed that social capital is an attribute of individuals that enhances their ability to solve collective action problems. Sociologists have studied collective action through human societies and observed that social capital plays an important role in maintaining communities though time as well as in simplifying the decision-making in them. In this work, we explore the use of Electronic Social Capital for optimising self-organised collective action.

We developed a context-independent Electronic Social Capital framework to test this hypothesis. The framework comprises a set of handlers that capture events from the system and update three different forms of social capital: trustworthiness, networks, and institutions. Later, a set of metrics are generated by the forms of social capital and used for decision-making. The framework was tested in different scenarios such as two-player games, n-player games, and public goods games. The experimental results show that social capital optimises the outcomes (in terms of long-term satisfaction and utility), reduces the complexity of decision-making, and scales with the size of the population.

This work proposes an alternative solution using Electronic Social Capital to represent and reason with qualitative, instead of traditional quantitative, values. This solution could be embedded into socio-technical systems to incentivise collective action without commodifying the resources or actions in the system.

References

  1. Ken Binmore. 2005. Natural Justice. Oxford University Press.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  2. Bernhard E. Boser, Isabelle M. Guyon, and Vladimir N. Vapnik. 1992. A training algorithm for optimal margin classifiers. In Proceedings of the 5th Annual Workshop on Computational Learning Theory (COLT’92). ACM, New York, 144--152. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  3. Pierre Bourdieu and Loïc J. D. Wacquant. 1992. An Invitation to Reflexive Sociology. Chicago University Press.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  4. Samuel Bowles and Herbert Gintis. 2002. Social capital and community governance. The Economic Journal 112, 483 (2002), F419--F436.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  5. Hendrik Van Brussel, Jo Wyns, Paul Valckenaers, Luc Bongaerts, and Patrick Peeters. 1998. Reference architecture for holonic manufacturing systems: {PROSA}. Computers in Industry 37, 3 (1998), 255--274. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  6. Estelle Cantillon and Martin Pesendorfer. 2004. Chapter 22: Auctioning Bus Routes: The London Experience. In Combinatorial Auctions.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  7. Yann Chevaleyre, Paul E. Dunne, Ulle Endriss, Jérôme Lang, Michel Lemaitre, Nicolas Maudet, Julian Padget, Steve Phelps, Juan A. Rodriguez-Aguilar, and Paulo Sousa. 2006. Issues in multiagent resource allocation. Informatica 30, 1 (2006).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  8. Owen Cliffe, Marina De Vos, and Julian Padget. 2006. Specifying and reasoning about multiple institutions. In Coordination, Organizations, Institutions, and Norms in Agent Systems II. Lecture Notes in Computer Science. 67--85.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  9. James S. Coleman. 1988. Social capital in the creation of human capital. American Journal of Sociology 94 (1988), S95--S120.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  10. National Research Council. 1998. Visionary Manufacturing Challenges for 2020. The National Academies Press, Washington, DC.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  11. Scott A. DeLoach. 2009. OMACS: A framework for adaptive, complex systems. In Multi-Agent Systems: Semantics and Dynamics of Organisational Models, V. Dignum (Ed.). IGI Global.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  12. Ada Diaconescu and Jeremy Pitt. 2015. Holonic institutions for multi-ccale polycentric self-governance. In COIN’14 Proceedings. Number 9372 in Lecture Notes in Artificial Intelligence. Springer. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  13. Virginia Dignum and Frank Dignum. 2012. A logic of agent organizations. Logic Journal of the IGPL 20, 1 (2012), 283--216.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  14. Rino Falcone and Cristiano Castelfranchi. 2011. Trust and relational capital. Computation and Mathematical Organization Theory 17, 2 (2011), 179--195. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  15. Rainer Feldmann, Martin Gairing, Thomas Lücking, Burkhard Monien, and Manuel Rode. 2003. Selfish Routing in Non-Cooperative Networks: A Survey. Springer, Berlin, 21--45.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  16. Mariana Ramos Franco, Gustavo A. L. Campos, and Jaime Simão Sichman. 2016. An empirical approach for relating environmental patterns with agent team compositions. In [email protected] Pre-proceedings.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  17. Simon Gächter. 2007. Conditional cooperation: Behavioral regularities from the lab and the field and their policy implications. In Psychology and Economics: A Promising New Cross-Disciplinary Field. MIT Press, Cambridge, MA, 19--50.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  18. Aram Galstyan, Karl Czajkowski, and Kristina Lerman. 2005. Resource allocation in the grid with learning agents. Journal of Grid Computing 3, 1 (2005), 91--100.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  19. Andrés García-Camino, Pablo Noriega, and Juan Antonio Rodríguez-Aguilar. 2005. Implementing norms in electronic institutions. In Proceedings of the Conference on Autonomous Agents and Multi-Agent Systems (AAMAS’05). ACM, 667--673. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  20. Anthony Giddens. 1984. The Constitution of Society. University of California Press.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  21. Natalie S. Glance and Bernardo A. Huberman. 1994. The dynamics of social dilemmas. Scientific American 270, 3 (1994), 76--81.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  22. Garrett Hardin. 1968. The tragedy of the commons. Science 162 (1968), 1243--1248.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  23. Jeff Heaton. 2015. Encog: Library of interchangeable machine learning models for java and C#. Journal of Machine Learning Research 16 (2015), 1243--1247. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  24. Jomi Hübner, Jaime Sichman, and Olivier Boissier. 2007. Developing organised multiagent systems using the MOISE model. IJAOSE 1, 3/4 (2007), 370--395. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  25. Leonid Hurwicz. 1973. The design of mechanisms for resource allocation. The American Economic Review 63, 2 (1973), 1--30.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  26. Andrew J. I. Jones. 2002. On the concept of trust. Decision Support Systems 33, 3 (2002), 225--232. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  27. Samuel Macbeth, Dídac Busquets, and Jeremy Pitt. 2014. Principled operationalization of social systems using Presage2. In Modeling and Simulation-Based Systems Engineering Handbook, D. Gianni, A. D’Ambrogio, and A. Tolk (Eds.). CRC Press.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  28. Naftaly Minsky. 2005. Law-Governed Interaction (LGI): A Distributed Coordination and Control Mechanism. Rutgers University.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  29. Roger B. Myerson. 1997. Game Theory—Analysis of Conflict. Harvard University Press. I--XIII, pp. 1--568.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  30. John F. Nash. 1950. Equilibrium points in -person games. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 36 (1950), 48--49.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  31. Mancur Olson. 1965. The Logic of Collective Action: Public Goods and the Theory of Groups. Number v.124 in Harvard economic studies. Harvard University Press.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  32. Elinor Ostrom. 1990. Governing the Commons. Cambridge University Press.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  33. Elinor Ostrom and T. K. Ahn. 2003. Foundations of Social Capital. Edward Elgar Publishing.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  34. Christos H. Papadimitriou and Tim Roughgarden. 2005. Computing equilibria in multi-player games. In Proceedings of the 16th Annual ACM-SIAM Symposium on Discrete Algorithms (SODA’05). 82--91. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  35. Jigar Patel, W. T. Luke Teacy, Nicholas R. Jennings, Michael Luck, Stuart Chalmers, Nir Oren, Timothy J. Norman, Alun Preece, Peter M. D. Gray, Gareth Shercliff, Patrick J. Stockreisser, Jianhua Shao, W. Alex Gray, Nick J. Fiddian, and Simon Thompson. 2005. Agent-based virtual organisations for the grid. Multiagent and Grid Systems 1, 4 (2005), 237--249. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  36. Patricio E. Petruzzi, Dídac Busquets, and Jeremy Pitt. 2014. Experiments with social capital in multi-agent systems. In Proceedings of the 17th International Conference on Principles and Practice of Multi-Agent Systems. 18--33.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  37. Patricio E. Petruzzi, Dídac Busquets, and Jeremy Pitt. 2014. Social capital as a complexity reduction mechanism for decision making in large scale open systems. In Proceedings of the 8th IEEE International Conference on Self-Adaptive and Self-Organizing Systems (SASO’14). 145--150. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  38. Patricio E. Petruzzi, Dídac Busquets, and Jeremy Pitt. 2015. A generic social capital framework for optimising self-organised collective action. In Proceedings of the 9th IEEE International Conference on Self-Adaptive and Self-Organizing Systems (SASO’15). 21--30. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  39. Patricio E. Petruzzi, Jeremy Pitt, and Dídac Busquets. 2016. Inter-institutional social capital for self-organising ‘nested enterprises’. In Proceedings of the 10th IEEE International Conference on Self-Adaptive and Self-Organizing Systems (SASO’16). 90--99.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  40. Isaac Pinyol and Jordi Sabater-Mir. 2013. Computational trust and reputation models for open multi-agent systems: A review. Artificial Intelligence Review 40, 1 (2013), 1--25. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  41. Jeremy Pitt, Dídac Busquets, Aikaterini Bourazeri, and Patricio E. Petruzzi. 2014. Collective intelligence and algorithmic governance of socio-technical systems. In Social Collective Intelligence: Combining the Powers of Humans and Machines to Build a Smarter Society, Daniele Miorandi, Vincenzo Maltese, Michael Rovatsos, Anton Nijholt, and James Stewart (Eds.). Springer-Verlag, 31--50.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  42. Jeremy Pitt and Andrzej Nowak. 2014. The reinvention of social capital for socio-technical systems. IEEE Technology and Socety Magazine 33, 1 (2014), 27--33.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  43. Robert D. Putnam. 1993. The prosperous community: Social capital and public life. The American Prospect (1993), 35--42.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  44. Nicholas Rescher. 1966. Distributive Justice. Bobbs-Merrill.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  45. Theodore W. Schultz. 1961. Investment in human capital. The American Economic Review 51, 1 (1961), 1--17.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  46. Toshiharu Sugawara. 2011. Emergence and stability of social conventions in conflict situations. In Proceedings of the 22nd International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence (IJCAI’11). 371--378. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  47. Chao Yu, Minjie Zhang, Fenghui Ren, and Xudong Luo. 2013. Emergence of social norms through collective learning in networked agent societies. In Proceedings of the 12th International Conference on Autonomous Agents and Multi-Agent Systems (AAMAS’13). 475--482. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library

Index Terms

  1. Electronic Social Capital for Self-Organising Multi-Agent Systems

    Recommendations

    Comments

    Login options

    Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.

    Sign in

    Full Access

    PDF Format

    View or Download as a PDF file.

    PDF

    eReader

    View online with eReader.

    eReader
    About Cookies On This Site

    We use cookies to ensure that we give you the best experience on our website.

    Learn more

    Got it!