[EN] Team formation is essential for developing teamwork-related skills in educational settings. The problem of team formation in the classroom consists of partitioning a classroom into non-overlapping teams of students, including every single student. Several algorithms have been proposed to automate the formation of teams, each employing different criteria for guiding the team formation process. Traditionally, metaheuristics have been a common approach due to the combinatorial complexity of the problem. This paper introduces a novel and general evolutionary algorithm for team formation in the classroom guided by mutation, the general concept of synergy between team members, and local search. Our algorithm allows for flexible team size constraints and the inclusion of compulsory and forbidden student combinations, which are not considered in existing methods but are important for capturing human relationships in the classroom. In addition, our algorithm is independent of the specific objective function employed to evaluate the teams formed. We present experiments comparing our proposal with other state-of-the-art algorithms, demonstrating robust performance across different objective functions employed in the team formation literature, superior scalability as the problem size increases, and remarkable performance in settings with or without the aforementioned constraints.

Abstract Throughout recent years, several researchers have proposed computational tools and algorithms to support team formation in the classroom. The result is that team formation algorithms have been widely applied in classroom environments to create well-balanced teams. One of the challenges in designing algorithms for automatic team formation is designing an appropriate function to estimate team performance, which is used as part of the optimization algorithm that divides students into teams. This function (referred to as a team evaluation heuristic) serves as an approximation to team performance, which is a complex phenomenon that is difficult to quantitatively assess in many settings and that cannot be accurately calculated prior to the task at hand. Despite showing their relative success compared to traditional and manual team formation strategies (manually employed by lecturers and teachers), there is a lack of research comparing team evaluation heuristics in a real classroom setting. Such a comparison would help teachers, practitioners, and system designers to appropriately select the most suitable team formation algorithms. In this article, we present an experimental evaluation that was carried out in a Bachelor’s Degree Program in Tourism that compares two team evaluation heuristics based on Belbin and Myer-Briggs. The experimental evaluation was carried out by means of an intelligent, extensible team formation tool whose optimization is based on an integer linear model that can be extended to support different team evaluation heuristics.

Conflict is an omnipresent phenomenon in human society. It spans from individual decision-making trade-offs such as deciding what to do next (sleep, eat, work, play), to complex scenarios including politics and business. The social sciences, psychology, economy, and biology study the nature of conflict, its consequences, and strategies to successfully deal with it. Over the last decades computer science has joined those disciplines and studies conflict from a computational perspective. This special issue presents a selection of the best papers presented at the First Workshop of Conflict Resolution in Decision Making (COREDEMA). The workshop focused on computational approaches that tackle conflict in order to provide new insights and explore potential applications. The workshop was jointly hosted with the 12th International Conference on Practical Applications of Agents and Multi-Agent Systems (PAAMS) in Salamanca, Spain, from June 4 to 6, 2013.

In this article, an agent-based negotiation model for negotiation teams that negotiate a deal with an opponent is presented. Agent-based negotiation teams are groups of agents that join together as a single negotiation party because they share an interest that is related to the negotiation process. The model relies on a trusted mediator that coordinates and helps team members in the decisions that they have to take during the negotiation process: which offer is sent to the opponent, and whether the offers received from the opponent are accepted. The main strength of the proposed negotiation model is the fact that it guarantees unanimity within team decisions since decisions report a utility to team members that is greater than or equal to their aspiration levels at each negotiation round. This work analyzes how unanimous decisions are taken within the team and the robustness of the model against different types of manipulations. An empirical evaluation is also performed to study the impact of the different parameters of the model.

Agent-based negotiation teams are negotiation parties formed by more than a single individual. Individuals unite as a single negotiation party because they share a common goal that is related to a negotiation with one or several opponents. My research goal is providing agent-based computational models for negotiation teams in multi-agent systems.