Search research articles

ABOUT JoVE

Overview Leadership Blog JoVE Help Center

AUTHORS

Publishing Process Editorial Board Scope & Policies Peer Review FAQ Submit

LIBRARIANS

Testimonials Subscriptions Access Resources Library Advisory Board FAQ

RESEARCH

JoVE Journal Methods Collections JoVE Encyclopedia of Experiments Archive

EDUCATION

JoVE Core JoVE Business JoVE Science Education JoVE Lab Manual Faculty Resource Center Faculty Site

Terms & Conditions of Use

Related Concept Videos

Decision Making: P-value Method

Decision Making: P-value Method

The process of hypothesis testing based on the P-value method includes calculating the P- value using the sample data and interpreting it.
First, a specific claim about the population parameter is proposed. The claim is based on the research question and is stated in a simple form. Further, an opposing statement to the claim is also stated. These statements can act as null and alternative hypotheses: a null hypothesis would be a neutral statement while the alternative hypothesis can...

Decision Making: Traditional Method

Decision Making: Traditional Method

The process of hypothesis testing based on the traditional method includes calculating the critical value, testing the value of the test statistic using the sample data, and interpreting these values.
First, a specific claim about the population parameter is decided based on the research question and is stated in a simple form. Further, an opposing statement to this claim is also stated. These statements can act as null and alternative hypotheses, out of which a null hypothesis would be a...

Decision Making

Decision Making

Decision-making is a fundamental cognitive process that involves evaluating alternatives and selecting among them. This process can range from simple choices, such as deciding what to wear, to complex decisions, like choosing a major in college or a career path. The complexity of the decision often dictates the approach we use, which can be broadly categorized into two types: automatic and controlled decision-making.
Automatic decision-making is fast, intuitive, and relies on gut feelings...

Frustration and Conflict: Approach-Approach, Approach-Avoidance

Frustration and Conflict: Approach-Approach, Approach-Avoidance

Frustration occurs when people are obstructed or prevented from achieving a desired goal or fulfilling a perceived need. For example, when someone's input is ignored in a discussion, it can lead to feelings of frustration. Conflict, however, arises from opposing interests, goals, or actions. Conflicts can take various forms based on the nature of these opposing desires or goals.
One common type of conflict is the Approach–Approach Conflict. In this case, a person faces two desirable...

Frustration and Conflict: Avoidance-Avoidance, Double-Approach Avoidance

Frustration and Conflict: Avoidance-Avoidance, Double-Approach Avoidance

Avoidance-avoidance conflict refers to a psychological situation where a person must choose between two or more unpleasant alternatives. These conflicts are particularly stressful because neither option is desirable. This dilemma is often expressed in sayings like "caught between a rock and a hard place" or "between the devil and the deep blue sea." For instance, individuals who fear dental procedures may find themselves torn between enduring a painful toothache or facing the...

Statically Indeterminate Problem Solving

Statically Indeterminate Problem Solving

Statically indeterminate problems are those where statics alone can not determine the internal forces or reactions. Consider a structure comprising two cylindrical rods made of steel and brass. These rods are joined at point B and restrained by rigid supports at points A and C. Now, the reactions at points A and C and the deflection at point B are to be determined. This rod structure is classified as statically indeterminate as the structure has more supports than are necessary for maintaining...

You might also read

Related Articles

Articles linked to this work by shared authors, journal, and citation graph.

Sort by

Same author

A scalable scheduling and resource management framework for cloud-native B2B applications.

Scientific reports·2025

Same author

Cloud-enabled e-commerce negotiation framework using bayesian-based adaptive probabilistic trust management model.

Scientific reports·2025

See all related articles

Search research articles

Related Experiment Videos

Optimizing Negotiation Conflict in the Cloud Service Negotiation Framework Using Probabilistic Decision Making Model.

Rajkumar Rajavel¹, Mala Thangarathinam¹

¹Department of Information Science and Technology, Faculty of Information and Communication Engineering, Anna University, Chennai, Tamil Nadu 600025, India.

Thescientificworldjournal

|November 7, 2015

Summary

This study introduces a probabilistic model to reduce negotiation conflicts in cloud services. It optimizes long-term negotiation success and communication by using a multistage Markov decision process for heuristic decision-making.

Related Experiment Videos

Area of Science:

Computer Science
Artificial Intelligence
Operations Research

Background:

Negotiation conflict in cloud service agreements is a significant challenge.
Existing methods for conflict optimization rely on similarity approaches, with limited long-term effectiveness.
Causes of conflict include misperception, aggression, and uncertain participant goals.

Purpose of the Study:

To develop a novel probabilistic decision-making model for optimizing negotiation conflict in long-term cloud service agreements.
To enhance negotiation success rates and minimize communication overhead.
To address limitations of existing similarity-based approaches.

Main Methods:

Formulation of negotiation conflict management as a multistage Markov decision problem.
Development of a probabilistic decision model utilizing past negotiation state information.
Application of heuristic decision-making within a stochastic decision tree scenario.

Main Results:

The proposed model generates heuristic decisions at each negotiation stage, preventing negotiation break-offs.
The approach optimizes long-term negotiation success and minimizes communication overhead.
The model demonstrates potential for maximizing revenue in cloud service negotiations.

Conclusions:

A novel probabilistic decision model effectively optimizes negotiation conflict in cloud service frameworks.
The multistage Markov decision process offers a robust method for managing complex negotiation dynamics.
This research provides a pathway to improved efficiency and profitability in cloud service negotiations.