Negotiation Support Systems and Software Agents in E-Business Negotiations
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Experiments with negotiation software agents’ in frictionless commerce indicate potential for destructive behaviour. Most of the agents are capable of engaging in auctions and have no ability to conduct complex business negotiations. Recognizing that people and software agents operate in different although overlapping spheres we propose an environment in which negotiation and decision support systems work together with software agents in electronic negotiations. Based on our experiences with the Inspire system we constructed an environment comprising software agents, and negotiation and decision support systems. One agent monitors the process, facilitates the use of Inspire, interprets the negotiators’ activities and provides methodological advice. The architecture of this environment is based on the separation of user support functions from the autonomous software activities, separation of the support for individuals from facilitation and mediation; and scalability and the ability to provide linkages with the existing software.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it