zbMATH — the first resource for mathematics

Constraint proposal method for computing Pareto solutions in multi-party negotiations. (English) Zbl 0989.90082
Summary: The constraint proposal method for computing Pareto-optimal solutions is extended to multi-party negotiations. In the method a neutral coordinator assists decision makers in finding Pareto-optimal solutions so that the elicitation of the decision makers’ value functions is not required. During the procedure the decision makers have to indicate their most preferred points on different sets of linear constraints. The method can be used to generate either one Pareto-optimal solution dominating the status quo solution of the negotiation or an approximation to the Pareto frontier. In the latter case a distributive negotiation among the efficient agreements can be carried out afterwards.

90B50 Management decision making, including multiple objectives
90C29 Multi-objective and goal programming
Full Text: DOI
[1] Bazaraa, M.; Sherali, H.; Shetty, C., Nonlinear programming, (1993), Wiley New York · Zbl 0774.90075
[2] Bertsekas, D., Nonlinear programming, (1995), Athena Scientific Belmont, MA · Zbl 0935.90037
[3] Brams, S.; Taylor, A., Fair division, (1996), Cambridge University Press Cambridge
[4] Dennis, J.; Schnabel, R., Numerical methods for unconstrained optimization and nonlinear equations, (1983), Prentice-Hall Englewood Cliffs, NJ · Zbl 0579.65058
[5] Ehtamo, H.; Hämäläinen, R.; Heiskanen, P.; Teich, J.; Verkama, M.; Zionts, S., Generating Pareto solutions in a two-party setting: constraint proposal methods, Management science, 45, 12, 1697-1709, (1999) · Zbl 1231.91113
[6] H. Ehtamo, E. Kettunen, R. Hämäläinen, Searching for joint gains in multiparty negotiations, European Journal of Operational Research 130 (1) (2001) 54-69 · Zbl 1068.91015
[7] Ehtamo, H.; Verkama, M.; Hämäläinen, R., On distributed computation of Pareto solutions for two decision makers, IEEE transactions on systems, man and cybernetics part A, 26, 4, 1-6, (1996)
[8] Ehtamo, H.; Verkama, M.; Hamalainen, R., How to select fair improving directions in a negotiation model over continuous issues, IEEE transactions on systems, man and cybernetics part C, 29, 1, 26-31, (1999)
[9] Kuula, M., Solving intra-company conflicts using the RAMONA - interactive negotiation support system, Group decision and negotiation, 7, 447-464, (1998)
[10] Miettinen, K., Nonlinear multiobjective programming, (1999), Kluwer Academic Publishers Boston
[11] Raiffa, H., The art and science of negotiation, (1982), Harvard University Press Cambridge, MA
[12] Rockafellar, R., Convex analysis, (1970), Princeton University Press Princeton, NJ · Zbl 0193.18401
[13] Rudin, W., Principles of mathematical analysis, (1976), third ed McGraw-Hill, Singapore · Zbl 0148.02903
[14] Sawaragi, Y.; Nakayama, H.; Tanino, T., Theory of multiobjective optimization, (1985), Academic Press Orlando, FL · Zbl 0566.90053
[15] Sebenius, J., Negotiation analysis: a characterization and review, Management science, 38, 1, 18-38, (1992) · Zbl 0825.90301
[16] Teich, J.; Wallenius, H.; Kuula, M.; Zionts, S., A decision support approach for negotiation with an application to agricultural income policy negotiations, European journal of operational research, 81, 76-87, (1995) · Zbl 0913.90212
[17] Teich, J.; Wallenius, H.; Wallenius, J., Advances in negotiation science, Yöneylem arastirmasi dergisi/transactions on operational research, 6, 55-94, (1994)
[18] Teich, J.; Wallenius, H.; Wallenius, J.; Zionts, S., Identifying Pareto-optimal settlement for two-party resource allocation negotiations, European journal of operational research, 93, 536-549, (1996) · Zbl 0916.90169
[19] Verkama, M.; Ehtamo, H.; Hämäläinen, R., Distributed computation of Pareto solutions in N-player games, Mathematical programming, 74, 29-45, (1996) · Zbl 0868.90142
This reference list is based on information provided by the publisher or from digital mathematics libraries. Its items are heuristically matched to zbMATH identifiers and may contain data conversion errors. It attempts to reflect the references listed in the original paper as accurately as possible without claiming the completeness or perfect precision of the matching.