Learning consumer preferences using semantic similarity

Proceedings of the International Conference on Autonomous Agents

Volumn , Issue , 2007, Pages 1301-1308

  Aydoǧan, Reyhan ^a   Yolum, Pinar ^a  

^a BOGAZICI UNIVERSITY   (Turkey)

Author keywords

Inductive learning; Negotiation; Ontology; Semantic similarity

Indexed keywords

CONSUMER PREFERENCES; DYNAMIC ENVIRONMENTS; INDUCTIVE LEARNING; LEARNING TECHNIQUES; MULTI-AGENT NEGOTIATIONS; NEGOTIATION; SEMANTIC SIMILARITY; SERVICE CONTENTS; SERVICE PRICES; SHARED ONTOLOGIES; SIMILARITY METRICS; VERSION SPACES;

AUTONOMOUS AGENTS; EDUCATION; FUZZY CLUSTERING; INFORMATION THEORY; LEARNING ALGORITHMS; MULTI AGENT SYSTEMS; SEMANTICS;

ONTOLOGY;

EID: 60349086000     PISSN: None     EISSN: None     Source Type: Conference Proceeding    
DOI: 10.1145/1329125.1329401     Document Type: Conference Paper

References (20)

1. J. Brzostowski and R. Kowalczyk. On possibilistic case-based reasoning for selecting partners for multi-attribute agent negotiation. In Proceedings of the 4th Intl. Joint Conference on Autonomous Agents and MultiAgent Systems (AAMAS), pages 273-278, 2005.
2. L. Busch and I. Horstman. A comment on issue-by-issue negotiations. Games and Economic Behavior, 19:144-148, 1997.
3. J. K. Debenham. Managing e-market negotiation in context with a multiagent system. In Proceedings 21st International Conference on Knowledge Based Systems and Applied Artificial Intelligence, ES'2002:, 2002.
4. P. Faratin, C. Sierra, and N. R. Jennings. Using similarity criteria to make issue trade-offs in automated negotiations. Artificial Intelligence, 142:205-237, 2002.
5. S. Fatima, M. Wooldridge, and N. Jennings. Optimal agents for multi-issue negotiation. In Proceeding of the 2nd Intl. Joint Conference on Autonomous Agents and MultiAgent Systems (AAMAS), pages 129-136, 2003.
6. C. Giraud-Carrier. A note on the utility of incremental learning. AI Communications, 13(4):215-223, 2000.
7. T.-P. Hong and S.-S. Tseng. Splitting and merging version spaces to learn disjunctive concepts. IEEE Transactions on Knowledge and Data Engineering, 11(5):813-815, 1999.
8. D. Lin. An information-theoretic definition of similarity. In Proc. 15th International Conf. on Machine Learning, pages 296-304. Morgan Kaufmann, San Francisco, CA, 1998.
9. P. Maes, R. H. Guttman, and A. G. Moukas. Agents that buy and sell. Communications of the ACM, 42(3):81-91, 1999.
10. T. M. Mitchell. Machine Learning. McGraw Hill, NY, 1997.
11. OWL. OWL: Web ontology language guide, 2003. http://www.w3.org/TR/2003/ CR-owl-guide-20030818/.
12. S. K. Pal and S. C. K. Shiu. Foundations of Soft Case-Based Reasoning. John Wiley & Sons, New Jersey, 2004.
13. J. R. Quinlan. Induction of decision trees. Machine Learning, 1(1):81-106, 1986.
14. F. Sadri, F. Toni, and P. Torroni. Dialogues for negotiation: Agent varieties and dialogue sequences. In ATAL 2001, Revised Papers, volume 2333 of LNAI, pages 405-421. Springer-Verlag, 2002.
15. M. P. Singh. Value-oriented electronic commerce. IEEE Internet Computing, 3(3):6-7, 1999.
16. V. Tamma, S. Phelps, I. Dickinson, and M. Wooldridge. Ontologies for supporting negotiation in e-commerce. Engineering Applications of Artificial Intelligence, 18:223-236, 2005.
17. A. Tversky. Features of similarity. Psychological Review, 84(4):327-352, 1977.
18. P. E. Utgoff. Incremental induction of decision trees. Machine Learning, 4:161-186, 1989.
19. Wine, 2003. http://www.w3.org/TR/2003/CR-owl-guide-20030818/wine.rdf.
20. Z. Wu and M. Palmer. Verb semantics and lexical selection. In 32nd. Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics, pages 133-138, 1994.