4. Introduction
Research Scope
TMS
A-TMS
ASC-TMS
Evaluation
Conclusion
Trust in Virtual Communities
In virtual communities, decisions made by members are risky and
uncertain
Who can access my resources?
Who can join my community?
Does security help?
Resources and actors should be known !
How much credit can I assign to the partner?
Who is the best partner I can interact with?
3
5. Introduction
Research Scope
TMS
A-TMS
ASC-TMS
Evaluation
Conclusion
Trust in Virtual Communities
In virtual communities, decisions made by members are risky and
uncertain
Who can access my resources?
Who can join my community?
Does security help?
Resources and actors should be known !
How much credit can I assign to the partner?
Who is the best partner I can interact with?
Trust
Trust enables people to make decisions in complex environments
based on positive expectations [Luhmann, 1990]
3
6. Introduction
Research Scope
TMS
A-TMS
ASC-TMS
Evaluation
Conclusion
Trust in Virtual Communities
In virtual communities, decisions made by members are risky and
uncertain
Who can access my resources?
Who can join my community?
Does security help?
Resources and actors should be known !
How much credit can I assign to the partner?
Who is the best partner I can interact with?
Trust
Trust enables people to make decisions in complex environments
based on positive expectations [Luhmann, 1990]
3
7. Introduction
Research Scope
TMS
A-TMS
ASC-TMS
Evaluation
Conclusion
Objectives
Design a system that assists members of open and decentralised
virtual communities in their trust decisions
Challenging Properties
Openness: people can join and leave communities at will
Dynamics: ever-evolving context
Social-Compliance: self-interests vs. collective objectives
Decentralization: no central authority
4
8. Introduction
Research Scope
TMS
A-TMS
ASC-TMS
Evaluation
Conclusion
Objectives
Design a system that assists members of open and decentralised
virtual communities in their trust decisions
Challenging Properties
Openness: people can join and leave communities at will
Dynamics: ever-evolving context
Social-Compliance: self-interests vs. collective objectives
Decentralization: no central authority
4
10. Introduction
Research Scope
TMS
A-TMS
ASC-TMS
Evaluation
Conclusion
Soft Trust Approaches
Trust in Computer Science
Social
Relations
Reputation
ReGret
Hard Trust Approaches
LIAR
FIRE
STM
Computational
Trust
Trust
Model
ForTrust
MAS
Social
Trust
1970
hybrid
Reliability
PGP
(WoT)
Rei
Social
Trust
Deontic
Trust
Management
ACL
X.509
(PKI)
1990
CTM
PROTUNE
Ponder
Policy
Maker
2000
RT
Negotiation
Roles
XACML
1.0
Trust
Builder
Attributes
2005
IBM
TE
ATNAC
XACML
2.0
XACML
3.0
2008
2012
6
11. Introduction
Research Scope
TMS
A-TMS
ASC-TMS
Evaluation
Conclusion
Hard vs Soft Trust Approaches
How the challenging properties have been addressed?
Openness
Dynamics
Social-Compliance
Decentralization
Hard Trust
Attributes
Policies
Integration
Delegation
Soft Trust
Experience
Context-Awareness
Social Control/Norms
Multi-Agent
7
15. Introduction
Research Scope
TMS
A-TMS
ASC-TMS
Evaluation
Conclusion
Research Objectives
Assist virtual community
members in their trust
decisions taking into
account:
Openness
Dynamics
Social-Compliance
Decentralization
Social-Compliance
Individual Policy
Adaptation to
the Collective
Collective Policy
Adaptation to
the Individual
Adaptiveness
Individual Policy
Individual Policy
Adaptation to the
Adaptation to the
Environment
Partner
Trust Factors
Trust Policy
8
16. Introduction
Research Scope
TMS
A-TMS
ASC-TMS
Evaluation
Conclusion
Research Objectives
Assist virtual community
members in their trust
decisions taking into
account:
Openness
Dynamics
Social-Compliance
Decentralization
Multi-Agent Based
Trust Management System
Social-Compliance
Individual Policy
Adaptation to
the Collective
Collective Policy
Adaptation to
the Individual
Adaptiveness
Individual Policy
Individual Policy
Adaptation to the
Adaptation to the
Environment
Partner
Trust Factors
Trust Policy
8
17. Introduction
Research Scope
TMS
1
Adaptive TMS (A-TMS)
5
Adaptive and
Socially-Compliant TMS
(ASC-TMS)
Conclusion
Trust Management
System (TMS)
Trust Factors
Ontology
Flexible Policy
Language
4
Evaluation
Research Scope
3
ASC-TMS
Introduction
2
A-TMS
6
Trust Policy
Evaluation
7
Trust Factors
Conclusion
9
22. Introduction
Research Scope
TMS
A-TMS
ASC-TMS
Evaluation
Conclusion
Trust Factors Ontology (TFO) ∆f
A hybrid trust management approach
Trust
Factor
Reliability
Experience
Proof
Competences
Indicator
Selfishness
Experience
Membership
Degree
Reputation
Prof.
Bachelor
Is A
Master
PhD
Subsumption
Disjonction
Licence
Engineer
10
23. Introduction
Research Scope
TMS
A-TMS
ASC-TMS
Evaluation
Conclusion
Trust Factors Ontology (TFO) ∆f
A hybrid trust management approach
Trust
Factor
Reliability
Experience
Proof
Competences
Indicator
Selfishness
Experience
Membership
Degree
Reputation
Prof.
Bachelor
Is A
Master
PhD
Subsumption
Disjonction
Licence
Higher
Lower
Engineer
10
24. Introduction
Research Scope
TMS
A-TMS
ASC-TMS
Evaluation
Conclusion
Trust Factors Ontology (TFO) ∆f
A hybrid trust management approach
Trust
Factor
Reliability
Experience
Proof
Competences
Indicator
Selfishness
Experience
Membership
Degree
Reputation
Prof.
Bachelor
Is A
Master
PhD
Subsumption
Disjonction
Licence
Higher
Lower
Engineer
Equivalent
10
25. Introduction
Research Scope
TMS
A-TMS
ASC-TMS
Evaluation
Conclusion
Policy Language
A policy is defined by a set of trust criteria
πPattern = { f1 , o1 , v1 , w1 , t1 , ..., fn , on , vn , wn , tn }
Issuer
Where :
fi is the trust factor name (f ∈ ∆f .T )
oi is a comparison operator from (oi ∈ {>, <, ≤, ≥, , =})
vi is a threshold value (vi ∈ ∆f .A )
wi is a weight value (wi ∈ Z)
ti ∈ {’m’, ’o’} specifies if the criterion is mandatory or not
Bob’s policy for the pattern access , notes
access
πbob ,notes = { identity , ≥, marginal , 2, m ,
age , >, 18, 2, m , age , <, 30, 2, m ,
reputation, ≥, 60%, 2, o ,
recommendation, ≤, 2, 1, o }
11
26. Introduction
Research Scope
TMS
A-TMS
ASC-TMS
Evaluation
Conclusion
Policy Evaluation
The evaluation E(πx , ψb ) of:
a
The policy πx = { f1 , op1 , v1 , w1 , t1 , . . . , fn , opn , vn , wn , tn }
a
With respect to the profile ψb = q, b , { f1 , v1 , . . . , fm , vm }
n
i=1,j=1 E ( fi ,opi ,vi ,wi ,ti , fj ,vj )
n
x
b
i =1 wi
E(πa , ψ ) =
0 if a mandatory criterion is not satisfied
where:
wi if fi = fj and fi opi fj
E ( fi , opi , vi , wi , ti , fj , vj ) =
0, otherwise
(1)
12
27. Introduction
Research Scope
TMS
A-TMS
ASC-TMS
Evaluation
Conclusion
Illustration of Policy Evaluation
Policy of the controller
tc(identity, ≥, marginal, 2, m)
tc(age, >, 18, 2, m)
tc(age, <, 30, 2, m)
tc(reputation, ≥, 70, 2, o)
tc(recommendation, ≥, 3, 1, o)
Profile of the requester
credential(identity, alice, complete)
credential(age, alice, 25)
declaration(reputation, alice, 50)
Policy
Evaluation
declaration(recommendation, alice, 0)
2+2+2+0+0
= 0.66
9
13
28. Introduction
Research Scope
TMS
A-TMS
ASC-TMS
Evaluation
Conclusion
Illustration of Policy Evaluation
Policy of the controller
tc(identity, ≥, marginal, 2, m)
tc(age, >, 18, 2, m)
tc(age, <, 30, 2, m)
tc(reputation, ≥, 70, 2, o)
tc(recommendation, ≥, 3, 1, o)
Profile of the requester
credential(identity, alice, unknown)
credential(age, alice, 25)
declaration(reputation, alice, 75)
Policy
Evaluation
declaration(recommendation, alice, 0)
0
13
29. Introduction
Research Scope
TMS
1
Adaptive TMS (A-TMS)
Individual to
Environment
Individual To
Individual
Conclusion
Trust Management
System (TMS)
4
Evaluation
Research Scope
3
ASC-TMS
Introduction
2
A-TMS
5
Adaptive and
Socially-Compliant TMS
(ASC-TMS)
6
Trust Factors
Trust Policy
Evaluation
7
Adaptiveness
Individual Policy
Individual Policy
Adaptation to the
Adaptation to the
Environment
Partner
Conclusion
14
32. Introduction
Research Scope
TMS
A-TMS
ASC-TMS
Evaluation
Conclusion
Adaptation Meta-Policies
Adaptive Trust Negotiation and Access Control
[Ryutov et al., 2005]
Extension of the policy language with Adaptation
meta-policies.
When policies should be adapted
How they can be adapted
Meta-policies
Event : Condition ← Actions
Actions include (but not limited to) adaptation operators
AddCriterion(π, tci )
DelCriterion(π, fi )
UpdateCriterion(π, fi )
RelaxCriterion(π, fi )
RestrictCriterion(π, fi )
LowerCriterion(π, fi )
HigherCriterion(π, fi )
16
33. Introduction
Research Scope
TMS
A-TMS
ASC-TMS
Evaluation
Conclusion
Adaptation Meta-Policies
Adaptive Trust Negotiation and Access Control
[Ryutov et al., 2005]
Extension of the policy language with Adaptation
meta-policies.
When policies should be adapted
How they can be adapted
Meta-policies
Event : Condition ← Actions
Actions include (but not limited to) adaptation operators
AddCriterion(π, tci )
DelCriterion(π, fi )
UpdateCriterion(π, fi )
RelaxCriterion(π, fi )
RestrictCriterion(π, fi )
LowerCriterion(π, fi )
HigherCriterion(π, fi )
16
34. Introduction
Research Scope
TMS
A-TMS
ASC-TMS
Evaluation
Conclusion
Illustration of adaptation to environment
Adaptation to resource value
_,file
Instantiate (πBob , R ) :R .value t > R .value t −1 ∨
R .sensitivity t > R .sensitivity t −1 ←
_,file
RestrictCriterion(πBob , reputation),
_,file
RestrictCriterion(πBob , recommendation)
Initial Policy
read
πbob ,file ={ identity , ≥, marginal , 2, m ,
age , >, 18, 2, m , age , <, 30, 2, o ,
reputation, ≥, 50%, 3, o , recommendation, >, 2, 1, o }
17
35. Introduction
Research Scope
TMS
A-TMS
ASC-TMS
Evaluation
Conclusion
Illustration of adaptation to environment
Adaptation to resource value
_,file
Instantiate (πBob , R ) :R .value t > R .value t −1 ∨
R .sensitivity t > R .sensitivity t −1 ←
_,file
RestrictCriterion(πBob , reputation),
_,file
RestrictCriterion(πBob , recommendation)
Adapted Policy
read
πbob ,file ={ identity , ≥, marginal , 2, m ,
age , >, 18, 2, m , age , <, 30, 2, o ,
reputation, ≥, 60%, 3, o , recommendation, >, 3, 1, o }
17
36. Introduction
Research Scope
TMS
A-TMS
ASC-TMS
Evaluation
Conclusion
Adaptation of the Individual to the Partner
Multi-Agent Based
Trust Management System
Social-Compliance
Individual Policy
Adaptation to
the Collective
Collective Policy
Adaptation to
the Individual
Adaptiveness
Individual Policy
Individual Policy
Adaptation to the
Adaptation to the
Environment
Partner
Trust Factors
Trust Policy
18
37. Introduction
Research Scope
TMS
A-TMS
ASC-TMS
Evaluation
Conclusion
Automated Trust Negotiation
Credentials =⇒
contain sensitive
information
Trust Deadlock !
Controller
Evaluation =⇒
Credentials
Disclosure
Requester
Trust Builder [Yu et al., 2003, Lee et al., 2009], IBM TE
[Herzberg et al., 2000], Trust−X [Bertino et al., 2003], RT
[Li et al., 2002]
subject S requests action A on resource R
Evidence for property X ?
Evidence for property Y ?
Evidence for property Y
Evidence for property X
Authorization for S to perform A on R
19
42. Introduction
Research Scope
1
Trust Management
System (TMS)
ASC-TMS
Evaluation
Conclusion
Research Scope
3
A-TMS
Introduction
2
TMS
4
Adaptive TMS (A-TMS)
5
Adaptive and
Socially-Compliant TMS
(ASC-TMS)
Individual to Collective
Collective to Individual
Multi-Agent Based
TMS
6
Individual Policy
Adaptation to
the Collective
Collective Policy
Adaptation to
the Individual
Adaptiveness
Individual Policy
Individual Policy
Adaptation to the
Adaptation to the
Environment
Partner
Trust Factors
Trust Policy
Evaluation
7
Social-Compliance
Conclusion
22
46. Introduction
Research Scope
TMS
A-TMS
ASC-TMS
Evaluation
Conclusion
Integration Mechanism
f1 , o1 , v1 , w1 , t1
f1 , o1 , v1 , w1 , t1
f2 , o2 , v2 , w2 , t2
f2 , o2 , v2 , w2 , t2
.........................
.........................
fn , on , vn , wn , tn
Ri = Rj
fn , on , vn , wn , tn
Ri
Ri Converge Rj
Ri
Rj
Ri Diverges Rj
Rj
Ri
Rj
Integration
Ri Extends Rj
f1 , o1 , v1 , w1 , t1
f2 , o2 , v2 , w2 , t2
Ri Restricts Rj
Ri
Rj
Ri Suffles Rj / Rj Suffles Ri
.........................
fn , on , vn , wn , tn
XACML [Humenn, 2003, Cover, 2007], Combination
[Rao et al., 2009] and Integration [Rao et al., 2011]
24
47. Introduction
Research Scope
TMS
A-TMS
ASC-TMS
Evaluation
Conclusion
Policies Integration Heuristics
h1 : p is at least as restrictive as the most restrictive policy
I’m sure to deny all requests both policies would have denied
h2 : p is at most as restrictive as the least restrictive policy
I’m sure to accept request that both policies would have
accepted
h3 : p is at least as restrictive as the selected policy
I’m sure to deny all requests me/my community would have
denied
h4 : p is at most as restrictive as the selected policy
I’m sure to accept all requests me/my community would have
accepted
25
48. Introduction
Research Scope
TMS
A-TMS
ASC-TMS
Evaluation
Conclusion
Illustration of Individual Adaptation to the Collective
(identity, ≥, f air, 3, m)
(reputation, ≥, 70, 2, o)
(identity, ≥, marginal, 1, o)
(reputation, ≥, 75, 2, o)
(recommendation, ≥, 2, 3, o)
Individual Policy
Collective Policy
Integration
(identity, ≥, marginal, 4, m)
(reputation, ≥, 75, 4, o)
(recommendation, ≥, 2, 3, o)
26
49. Introduction
Research Scope
1
Trust Management
System (TMS)
ASC-TMS
Evaluation
Conclusion
Research Scope
3
A-TMS
Introduction
2
TMS
4
Adaptive TMS (A-TMS)
5
Adaptive and
Socially-Compliant TMS
(ASC-TMS)
Individual to Collective
Collective to Individual
Multi-Agent Based
TMS
6
Individual Policy
Adaptation to
the Collective
Collective Policy
Adaptation to
the Individual
Adaptiveness
Individual Policy
Individual Policy
Adaptation to the
Adaptation to the
Environment
Partner
Trust Factors
Trust Policy
Evaluation
7
Social-Compliance
Conclusion
27
69. Introduction
Research Scope
TMS
A-TMS
ASC-TMS
Evaluation
Conclusion
Synthesis on Social Compliance
→ Extension of the policy language with Adaptation meta-policies
Meta-policies
Event : Condition ← Actions
Actions includes context-awareness and social-awareness
operators
RelaxCriterion(π, fi )
Integrate(π1 , π2 , ih )
...
Combine(Π , c , ch , π )
→ Definition of coordination protocols
35
70. Introduction
Research Scope
1
Trust Management
System (TMS)
ASC-TMS
Evaluation
Conclusion
Research Scope
3
A-TMS
Introduction
2
TMS
4
Adaptive TMS (A-TMS)
5
Adaptive and
Socially-Compliant TMS
(ASC-TMS)
Individual to Collective
Collective to Individual
Multi-Agent Based
TMS
6
Social-Compliance
Individual Policy
Adaptation to
the Collective
Collective Policy
Adaptation to
the Individual
Adaptiveness
Individual Policy
Individual Policy
Adaptation to the
Adaptation to the
Environment
Partner
Trust Factors
Trust Policy
Evaluation
7
Multi-Agent Based
Trust Management System
Conclusion
36
71. Introduction
Research Scope
TMS
A-TMS
ASC-TMS
Evaluation
Conclusion
Multi-Agent Based Trust Management System
Organisation
Community
Role
Collective
Policies
A
Assistant
Agent
A
A
Interaction
ASC-TMS
T
A
T
T
Agents
T
Association
A
A
A
Individual
Policies
Adhesion
Negotiation
T
T
Public
Resource
Environment
Private
Resource
Control
T
Operation
Interactions
Decentralized
Trust Management
37
72. Introduction
Research Scope
TMS
A-TMS
ASC-TMS
Evaluation
Conclusion
Multi-Agent Based Trust Management System
Organisation
Community
Role
Collective
Policies
A
Assistant
Agent
A
A
Interaction
ASC-TMS
T
A
T
T
Agents
T
Association
A
A
A
Individual
Policies
Adhesion
Negotiation
T
T
Public
Resource
Environment
Private
Resource
Control
T
Operation
Interactions
Decentralized
Trust Management
37
73. Introduction
Research Scope
TMS
A-TMS
ASC-TMS
Evaluation
Conclusion
Multi-Agent Based Trust Management System
Organisation
Community
Role
Collective
Policies
A
Assistant
Agent
A
A
Interaction
ASC-TMS
T
A
T
T
Agents
T
Association
A
A
A
Individual
Policies
Adhesion
Negotiation
T
T
Environment
Private
Resource
Public
Resource
Decentralized
Trust Management
Control
T
Operation
Interactions
Coordination
Voting/Negotiation
Protocols
37
74. Introduction
Research Scope
TMS
A-TMS
ASC-TMS
Evaluation
Conclusion
Multi-Agent Based Trust Management System
Organisation
Community
Role
Collective
Policies
A
Assistant
Agent
A
A
Interaction
ASC-TMS
T
A
T
T
Agents
T
Association
A
A
A
Individual
Policies
Adhesion
Negotiation
T
T
Environment
Private
Resource
Public
Resource
Decentralized
Trust Management
Control
T
Coordination
Voting/Negotiation
Protocols
Operation
Interactions
Norms
Organisations
37
75. Introduction
Research Scope
TMS
A-TMS
ASC-TMS
Evaluation
Conclusion
Multi-Agent Based Trust Management System
Organisation
Community
Role
Collective
Policies
A
Assistant
Agent
A
A
Interaction
ASC-TMS
T
A
T
T
Agents
T
Association
A
A
A
Individual
Policies
Adhesion
Negotiation
T
T
Environment
Private
Resource
Public
Resource
Decentralized
Trust Management
Control
T
Coordination
Voting/Negotiation
Protocols
Operation
Interactions
Norms
Organisations
37
77. Introduction
Research Scope
TMS
A-TMS
ASC-TMS
Evaluation
Conclusion
Implementations
Demonstrate the applicability of ASC-TMS
Deploy the model on the JaCaMo Platform
[Boissier et al., 2011]
Use of ASC-TMS in Open Innovation Community Application
Extension of the model for mobiles (JaCaAndroid)
Evaluate ASC-TMS
Implementation on Repast Simulation Platform [Collier, 2003]
Run the model on large scale populations
Observe the benefit of ASC-TMS
Evaluate the impact of ASC-TMS on communities dynamics
39
78. Introduction
Research Scope
TMS
A-TMS
ASC-TMS
Evaluation
Conclusion
Evaluation Objective
Study the benefit of using social compliance in trust management
within virtual communities
Impact of combination on communities dynamics
Impact of social-compliance on communities dynamics
Correlation between social-compliance and communities
dynamics
Impact of evolution on communities dynamics
40
80. Introduction
Research Scope
TMS
A-TMS
ASC-TMS
Evaluation
Conclusion
Experimental Settings
Use case: Communities for Open innovation challenges
Challenges
Objectives: 10 000 resource units
Deadline: 1000 steps
Reward: 1000 $
Rules:
Non Compliant members are ejected from their community
Empty communities are destroyed (collapse)
Simulation Metrics
Number of communities
Population of each community
41
81. Introduction
Research Scope
TMS
A-TMS
ASC-TMS
Evaluation
Conclusion
Experimental Settings
Use case: Communities for Open innovation challenges
Challenges
Objectives: 10 000 resource units
Deadline: 1000 steps
Reward: 1000 $
Rules:
Non Compliant members are ejected from their community
Empty communities are destroyed (collapse)
Simulation Metrics
Number of communities
Population of each community
41
82. Introduction
Research Scope
TMS
A-TMS
ASC-TMS
Evaluation
Conclusion
Parameters
Agents
Policies and Credentials are randomly generated
Collaborativeness: uniform distribution ([0,1])
Competence: normal distribution ([0,1])
Interaction: probability of 0.8
Different populations in terms of social-compliance
(With/Without) Combination
With a probability (0/0.5/0.8/1) of Integration
(With/Without) Evolution
42
83. Introduction
Research Scope
TMS
A-TMS
ASC-TMS
Evaluation
Conclusion
Impact of combination on communities dynamics
25
35
30
Average Population Size
Number of Communities
20
15
10
5
25
20
15
10
5
0
0
No Combination - No Integration - No Evolution
Combination - No Integration - No Evolution
No Combination - No Integration - No Evolution
Combination - No Integration - No Evolution
-5
-5
0
2000
4000
6000
8000
Simulation Step
10000
12000
0
2000
4000
6000
8000
10000
12000
Simulation Step
43
84. Introduction
Research Scope
TMS
A-TMS
ASC-TMS
Evaluation
Conclusion
Impact of integration on communities dynamics
35
40
35
30
Average Population Size
Number of Communities
30
25
20
15
10
5
25
20
15
10
5
0
0
No Combination - No Integration - No Evolution
Combination - No Integration - No Evolution
Combination - 1.0 Integration - No Evolution
-5
No Combination - No Integration - No Evolution
Combination - No Integration - No Evolution
Combination - 1.0 Integration - No Evolution
-5
0
2000
4000
6000
8000
Simulation Step
10000
12000
0
2000
4000
6000
8000
10000
12000
Simulation Step
44
85. Introduction
Research Scope
TMS
A-TMS
ASC-TMS
Evaluation
Conclusion
Compliance and Communities Dynamics Correlation
35
40
35
30
Average Population Size
Number of Communities
30
25
20
15
10
5
25
20
15
10
5
No Combination - No Integration - No Evolution
Combination - No Integration - No Evolution
Combination - 0.5 Integration - No Evolution
Combination - 0.8 Integration - No Evolution
Combination - 1.0 Integration - No Evolution
0
No Combination - No Integration - No Evolution
Combination - No Integration - No Evolution
Combination - 0.5 Integration - No Evolution
Combination - 0.8 Integration - No Evolution
Combination - 1.0 Integration - No Evolution
0
-5
-5
0
2000
4000
6000
8000
Simulation Step
10000
12000
0
2000
4000
6000
8000
10000
12000
Simulation Step
45
87. Introduction
Research Scope
TMS
A-TMS
ASC-TMS
Evaluation
Conclusion
Results Synthesis
Without integration (i.e. adaptation of individual trust policies
to collective ones), disappearing of communities is more
frequent
Social compliance helps communities to work better
Combination and evolution are important mechanisms to help
agent to maintain communities even if non social compliant
members exist (up to 20%)
47
88. Introduction
Research Scope
TMS
A-TMS
ASC-TMS
Evaluation
Conclusion
Contributions
ASC-TMS is a new Hybrid Trust Approach combining Hard
and Soft Trust Approaches
ASC-TMS proposes a rich, expressive and flexible policy
language addressing both individual and collective
dimensions
ASC-TMS addresses both individual and collective Trust
Management and Adaptation
ASC-TMS bridges the gap between Social Science, Trust
Management and Distributed Artificial Intelligence
48
89. Introduction
Research Scope
TMS
A-TMS
ASC-TMS
Evaluation
Conclusion
Future Works
Extend and enrich the evaluation of ASC-TMS (w.r.t,
Populations, Heuristics, Coordination)
Confront ASC-TMS to Social Science Theories and Existing
Trust Models
Enrich the expressiveness of the ASC-TMS policy language
Extend the adaptation mechanisms at the individual and
collective levels with learning capabilities to learn from past
experiences
Apply the adaptation mechanism to the evolution of the Trust
Factors Ontology
49
90. Introduction
Research Scope
TMS
A-TMS
ASC-TMS
Evaluation
Conclusion
Related Publications
Yaich, R., Boissier, O., Picard, G., and Jaillon, P. (2013). Adaptiveness and social-compliance in trust
management within virtual communities. Web Intelligence and Agent Systems (WIAS), Special Issue: Web
Intelligence and Communities (to appear).
Yaich, R., Boissier, O., Picard, G, and Jaillon, P. (2012). An agent based trust management system for multi-agent
based virtual communities. In Demazeau, Y., Müller, J. P., Rodríguez, J. M. C., and Pérez, J. B., editors,
Advances on Practical Applications of Agents and Multiagent Systems, Proc. of the 10th International Conference
on Practical Applications of Agents and Multi-Agent Systems (PAAMS 12), volume 155 ofAdvances in Soft
Computing Series, pages 217-223. Springer.
Yaich, R., Boissier, O., Jaillon, P., and Picard, G. (2012). An adaptive and socially-compliant trust management
system for virtual communities. InThe 27th ACM Symposium On Applied Computing (SAC 2012), pages
2022-2028. ACM Press.
Yaich, R., Boissier, O., Picard, G., and Jaillon, P. (2011). Social-compliance in trust management within virtual
communities. In European Workshop on Multi-agent Systems (EUMAS’11).
Yaich, R., Boissier, O., Jaillon, P., and Picard, G. (2011). Social-compliance in trust management within virtual
communities. In 3rd International Workshop on Web Intelligence and Communities (WIC’11) at the International
Conferences on Web Intelligence and Intelligent Agent Technology (WI-IAT 2011), pages 322-325. IEEE
Computer Society.
´
Yaich, R., Jaillon, P., Boissier, O., and Picard, G. (2011). Gestion de la confiance et intgration des exigences
sociales au sein de communautés virtuelles. In 19es Journées francophones des systèmes multi-agents
(JFSMA’11), pages 213-222. Cépaduès.
Yaich, R., Jaillon, P., Picard, G., and Boissier, O. (2010). Toward an adaptive trust policy model for open and
decentralized virtual communities. InWorkshop on Trust and Reputation. Interdisciplines.
50
92. References I
Bertino, E., Ferrari, E., and Squicciarini, A. (2003).
X -tnl: An xml-based language for trust negotiations.
In Proceedings of the 4th IEEE International Workshop on Policies
for Distributed Systems and Networks, POLICY ’03, pages 81–,
Washington, DC, USA. IEEE Computer Society.
Boissier, O., Bordini, R. H., Hübner, J. F., Ricci, A., and Santi, A.
(2011).
Multi-agent oriented programming with jacamo.
Science of Computer Programming, (0):–.
Collier, N. (2003).
RePast : An Extensible Framework for Agent Simulation.
52
93. References II
Cover, R. (2007).
Extensible Access Control Markup Language (XACML).
Herzberg, A., Mass, Y., Michaeli, J., Ravid, Y., and Naor, D. (2000).
Access control meets public key infrastructure, or: Assigning roles to
strangers.
In Proceedings of the 2000 IEEE Symposium on Security and
Privacy, SP ’00, pages 2–, Washington, DC, USA. IEEE Computer
Society.
Humenn, P. (2003).
The formal semantics of XACML.
Technical report, Syracuse University.
53
94. References III
Lee, A. J., Winslett, M., and Perano, K. J. (2009).
Trustbuilder2: A reconfigurable framework for trust negotiation.
In Ferrari, E., Li, N., Bertino, E., and Karabulut, Y., editors, Trust
Management III, volume 300 of IFIP Advances in Information and
Communication Technology, pages 176–195. Springer Berlin
Heidelberg.
Li, N., Mitchell, J. C., and Winsborough, W. H. (2002).
Design of a role-based trust-management framework.
In Proceedings of the 2002 IEEE Symposium on Security and
Privacy, SP ’02, pages 114–, Washington, DC, USA. IEEE
Computer Society.
54
95. References IV
Luhmann, N. (1990).
Familiarity, confidence, trust: Problems and alternatives.
In Trust: Making and breaking cooperative relations, pages 15–35.
Basil Blackwell.
Preece, J. (2004).
Online communities: researching sociability and usability in hard to
reach populations.
Australasian J. of Inf. Systems, 11(2).
55
96. References V
Rao, P., Lin, D., Bertino, E., Li, N., and Lobo, J. (2009).
An algebra for fine-grained integration of xacml policies.
In Proceedings of the 14th ACM symposium on Access control
models and technologies, SACMAT ’09, pages 63–72, New York,
NY, USA. ACM.
Rao, P., Lin, D., Bertino, E., Li, N., and Lobo, J. (2011).
Fine-grained integration of access control policies.
Computers Security, 30(2-3):91–107.
56
97. References VI
Ryutov, T., Zhou, L., Neuman, C., Leithead, T., and Seamons, K. E.
(2005).
Adaptive trust negotiation and access control.
In Proceedings of the tenth ACM symposium on Access control
models and technologies, SACMAT ’05, pages 139–146, New York,
NY, USA. ACM.
Yu, T., Winslett, M., and Seamons, K. E. (2003).
Supporting structured credentials and sensitive policies through
interoperable strategies for automated trust negotiation.
ACM Transactions on Information and System Security, 6(1):1–42.
57