The complexity of automated negotiation research calls for dedicated, user-friendly research frameworks that facilitate advanced analytics, comprehensive loggers, visualization tools, and auto-generated domains and preference profiles. This paper introduces NegoLog, a platform that provides advanced and customizable analysis modules to agent developers for exhaustive performance evaluation. NegoLog introduces an automated scenario and tournament generation tool in its Web-based user interface so that the agent developers can adjust the competitiveness and complexity of the negotiations. One of the key novelties of the NegoLog is an individual assessment of preference estimation models independent of the strategies.

The paper introduces a comprehensive human-agent negotiation framework designed to facilitate the development and evaluation of research studies on human-agent negotiation without building each component from scratch. Leveraging the interoperability and reusability of its components, this framework offers various functionalities, including speech-to-text conversion, emotion recognition, a repository of negotiation strategies, and an interaction manager capable of managing gestures designed for Nao, Pepper, and QT, and coordinating message exchanges in a turn-taking fashion. This framework aims to lower the entry barrier for researchers in human-agent negotiation by providing a versatile platform that supports a wide range of research directions, including affective computing, natural language processing, decision-making, and non-verbal communication.

Day by day, human-agent negotiation becomes more and more vital to reach a socially beneficial agreement when stakeholders need to make a joint decision together. Developing agents who understand not only human preferences but also attitudes is a significant prerequisite for this kind of interaction. Studies on opponent modeling are predominantly based on automated negotiation and may yield good predictions after exchanging hundreds of offers. However, this is not the case in human-agent negotiation in which the total number of rounds does not usually exceed tens. For this reason, an opponent model technique is needed to extract the maximum information gained with limited interaction. This study presents a conflict-based opponent modeling technique and compares its prediction performance with the well-known approaches in human-agent and automated negotiation experimental settings. According to the results of human-agent studies, the proposed model outpr erforms them despite the diversity of participants’ negotiation behaviors. Besides, the conflict-based opponent model estimates the entire bid space much more successfully than its competitors in automated negotiation sessions when a small portion of the outcome space was explored. This study may contribute to developing agents that can perceive their human counterparts’ preferences and behaviors more accurately, acting cooperatively and reaching an admissible settlement for joint interests.