JP2004166325A - Democratic government system - Google Patents

Abstract

<P>PROBLEM TO BE SOLVED: To improve the quality of a policy decision by operating a competition principle between an intention decision supporter agent and a conference agent for proposing/deciding the policy and to enhance an influence power to the supporter agent and the conference agent of the electorate agent. <P>SOLUTION: A democratic government system includes a plurality of the intention decision supporter agents each for proposing the policy or expressing the approval or disapproval of the proposed policy by proposing the policy from the electorate agent, accepting and adding up the decisions of the intentions such as the approval, the disapproval, etc. of the policy, the policy execution agent for executing the decided policy by the decision by majority of the approval or the disapproval of the supporter agent or the electorate agent in which the supporter agent accepts the trust, and means for paying a consideration meeting to an evaluation by calculating the evaluation of the decision of the policy of the supporter agent when the policy is decided or executed. <P>COPYRIGHT: (C)2004,JPO

Description

[0001]
TECHNICAL FIELD OF THE INVENTION
The present invention relates to a voter agent for paying tax and voting for a decision supporter, a decision supporter agent selected by a vote from voter agents and proposing and deciding a policy, and a decision supporter agent or a decision supporter for a policy. The present invention relates to a democratic political system comprising a policy executor agent for executing a policy determined by a majority vote of entrusted voters.
[0002]
[Prior art]
Conventional indirect democracy based on autonomy has been implemented in Japan and other countries. In indirect democracy, voters pay taxes and select (vote) decision supporters (members) by voting. A plurality of selected decision supporters (members) propose a policy or decide on the proposed policy by majority vote. The decided policy is implemented by a policy executor (for example, a government) (instructing a bureaucracy to implement the policy) and benefits the voters.
[0003]
As a conventional technology, a host computer of a general meeting is connected to a large number of terminal computers via a network, a proposal is presented to the terminal computer, questions and answers are input, and when the discussion is concluded, a vote for or against votes is input for the general meeting. There is a technology in which a host computer counts and distributes votes for or against approval (Patent Document 1).
[0004]
[Patent Document 1]
See the claims in JP-A-2001-209687.
[0005]
[Problems to be solved by the invention]
However, in the latter patent document 1, there is a problem that a question and answer on the policy is simply given between the decision supporter (member of parliament) and a large number of voters, and only the pros and cons of a controversial state are obtained.
[0006]
Further, in the former system described above, (1) the influence of the voter on the decision supporter is small, and once the decision supporter is selected by voting, the influence cannot be exercised until the next vote, and (2) ) Decision supporters have a shortage of funding and are less attractive for voters to enter into policy decisions that are useful to them. There are issues such as the lack of involvement in policy decisions that would benefit voters by competition.
[0007]
The present invention solves these problems by providing a voter agent, a decision support agent agent, and a policy enforcer agent in a political system, in which a decision support agent and a conference agent use a voter agent for policy proposal / decision. The more the government's intentions are reflected, the more support consideration is given, the principle of competition between decision support agents and conference agents for policy proposals / decisions is worked out, and the quality of policy decisions is improved, and voters' decisions are made. It aims to increase the influence on supporter agents and conference agents.
[0008]
[Means for Solving the Problems]
Means for solving the problem will be described with reference to FIG.
[0009]
In FIG. 1, a voter agent 1 selects a decision support agent agent 2 by voting, responds to approval or disapproval of a policy, pays a tax, receives a benefit by executing a policy, and the like.
[0010]
The decision support agent agent 2 is selected by a vote by the voter agent 1, and makes a policy and asks the voter agent for or disapproval of it, proposes a policy, or approves or disagrees with the policy by a majority decision. It decides the policy.
[0011]
The policy executor agent 3 proposes a policy, executes a determined policy, and the like.
[0012]
The political system 4 accepts pros and cons of the policy from the decision support agent 2 and makes a majority decision, evaluates the executed policy by the decision support agent 2 and the conference agent 7, and gives a price for the policy. Is what you do.
[0013]
Next, the operation will be described.
Decision support agent 2 accepts and indicates the vote from voter agent 1 in favor of or against the proposed policy, sums it up, and proposes a policy or expresses pros or cons of the proposed policy to political system 4, When the political system 4 is determined by the decision-making support agent agent 2 of the policy or by the majority decision of the voter 1 who is entrusted with the decision-making support agent agent 2, the policy executor agent 3 determines the determined policy. When the policy is executed, when the policy is determined or executed, the political system 4 calculates an evaluation of the decision support agent 2 for the policy decision, and pays a price commensurate with the evaluation.
[0014]
At this time, the evaluation of the policy decision is made based on the number of the decision support agent agents 2 who contributed to the policy decision or the number of the voter agents 1 to which the decision support agent agent 2 was commissioned. ing.
[0015]
A conference agent 7 of one or more layers is provided between the decision support agent 2 and the policy enforcer agent 3, and the intention of another conference agent 7 or the decision support agent 2 to which the conference agent 7 belongs is displayed. Is determined by a majority decision, and if there is a higher-level conference agent 7, a notice of intention is notified to the conference agent 7 so as to be determined by a majority decision.
[0016]
Accordingly, in the political system 4 in which the voter agent 1, the decision support agent agent 2, and the policy implementer agent 3 participate, the decision support agent agent 2 and the conference agent 7 determine the intention of the voter agent 1 for the policy proposal / decision. By giving more support consideration as much as possible, the principle of competition between the decision support agent agent 2 and the conference agent 7 for policy proposal / decision is exercised to improve the quality of policy decision and to improve the voter agent 1 It is possible to increase the influence on the decision support agent 2 and the conference agent 7.
[0017]
BEST MODE FOR CARRYING OUT THE INVENTION
Next, an embodiment and operation of the present invention will be sequentially described in detail with reference to FIGS.
[0018]
FIG. 1 shows a system configuration diagram of the present invention.
In FIG. 1, a voter agent 1 selects a decision support agent agent 2 by voting, or responds to the approval or disapproval of a policy (responses by entrusting the approval or disapproval of a policy to a decision support agent agent 2 or a policy enforcer agent 3). Responding directly to the pros and cons of the policy), paying taxes, and benefiting from the implementation of the policy.
[0019]
The decision-making support agent 2 is selected by a vote by the voter agent 1 or registered by his / her own will, and drafts a policy and asks the voter agent 1 for the pros or cons or proposes a policy. They decide on the policy by majority vote in favor of the policy or receive compensation corresponding to the evaluation of the policy decision.
[0020]
The policy executor agent 3 proposes a policy, executes a determined policy, and the like.
[0021]
The political system 4 accepts the approval or disapproval of the policy from the decision support agent 2 and makes a majority decision, causes the policy implementer agent 3 to execute the determined policy, and executes the decision support agent 2 for the policy decision. Is evaluated and given a price, etc., and here, it is composed of a decision making system 5, a supporter evaluation system 6, and the like.
[0022]
The decision-making system 5 aggregates the pros and cons of the policy from the decision support agent 2 or the pros and cons of the entrusted voters 1 and decides the policy by a majority decision, and causes the policy executor agent 3 to execute the decided policy. (To be described later with reference to FIGS. 2 to 4).
[0023]
The supporter evaluation system 6 determines, for example, when a policy is determined or executed, the evaluation of the decision-making supporter agent 2 for the determination of the policy, and gives consideration to the evaluation (FIG. 2). To FIG. 4 to be described later).
[0024]
Next, the overall operation of the configuration of FIG. 1 will be described according to the order of the flowchart of FIG.
[0025]
FIG. 2 shows a flowchart (overall) for explaining the operation of the present invention. Here, the voter agent 1, the system 4, the decision support agent 2, and the policy executor agent 3 correspond to the corresponding numbers in FIG.
[0026]
In FIG. 2, in S1, the voter agent 1 pays tax (pays various taxes) to the system 4 (the political system 4 in FIG. 1). Thus, in the system 4 that collects the tax, the decision support agent 2 evaluates the contribution to the decision of the policy, and pays a fee according to the evaluation, and uses it as the activity fund. The policy executor agent 3 receives the fund from the system 3 and executes the policy (eg, instructs and executes a bureaucracy).
[0027]
In S2, the voter agent 1 selects the decision support agent agent 2 in the election.
[0028]
In S3, the decision support agent 2 determines the executor (policy execution agent 3). This means that the decision support agent 2 selected by the vote in S2 determines the policy executor agent 3 (for example, it is determined by majority vote).
[0029]
At S4, the decision supporter Agent 2 presents the policy proposal to the system 4. The system 4 presents the presented policy proposal to the voter agent 1 and asks for its approval or disapproval.
[0030]
In step S5, the voter agent 1 directly participates in the presented policy and responds with its pros and cons.
[0031]
In step S6, the system 4 makes a decision based on the approval or disapproval of the policy expressed by direct participation from the voter agent 1 in step S5 (for example, the number of the decision support agent 2 or the voter agent 1 is aggregated to make a decision by majority decision). ), And notifies the determined policy to the policy executor agent 3 and executes it.
[0032]
In S7, the system 4 pays the support fee to the decision support agent 2. This evaluates the contribution of the decision support agent 2 relating to the policy decision determined and executed in S4 to S6 (for example, the number of decision support agents 2 who agree with the presented policy proposal or the decision The decision support agent 2 performs an evaluation corresponding to the number of voter agents acquired, and pays a price corresponding to the evaluation to the decision support agent 2 (that is, pays the price in accordance with the ratio of contribution to the policy decision). pay).
[0033]
In S8, the policy execution agent 3 executes the policy. In this case, the policy execution agent 3 instructs the bureaucracy or the like on the determined policy to execute the policy, and the voter agent 1 receives the benefit.
[0034]
As described above, the voter agent 1 pays the tax and selects the decision support agent 2 in the election. The selected decision support agent 2 determines the policy enforcer agent 3, and the decision support agent 2 or the policy enforcement agent. 3 presents the policy proposal, presents the policy proposal to the voter agent 1 and tallies their pros and cons. When the policy is decided by majority vote, the contribution to the decision of the policy is determined for each decision support agent agent 2 The policy executor agent 3 executes the decided policy, and the voter agent 1 can benefit from the executed result. Hereinafter, this will be described in more detail.
[0035]
FIG. 3 shows a flowchart (consignment) for explaining the operation of the present invention.
In FIG. 3, in step S11, the decision support agent (1) proposes a policy from the voter agent (1) to (3), and requests a trust of the right (agree / disagree, here, agree).
[0036]
In S12, the decision support agent (2) proposes the opposite of the policy from the voter agents (1) to (3) and requests the trustee of the right (here, the opposite).
[0037]
In step S13, the decision support agent (3) proposes a vote for the policy to the voter agents (1) to (3), and requests a trust of the right (here, the vote).
[0038]
In response to the requests from S11 to S13, the voter agents (1), (2), and (3) receive respective requests from the decision support agent agents (1), (2), and (3). Learn about agent's policy proposals, policies for and against.
[0039]
In S14, the voter agent (1) notifies the decision support agent (2) of the entrustment, and the decision support agent (2) receives the right to oppose the policy of the voter agent (1).
[0040]
In S15, the voter agent (2) notifies the decision support agent (3) of the entrustment, and the decision support agent (3) receives a right to agree with the policy of the voter agent (2).
[0041]
In S16, the voter agent (3) notifies the decision support agent (1) of the entrustment, and the decision support agent (1) receives a right to agree with the policy of the voter agent (3).
[0042]
According to the above S14 to S15, each decision support agent (1) to (3) was entrusted with the vote of the voter agent (1) to (3) for the policy, and was entrusted with the policy for or against the policy. Become.
[0043]
From S17 to S19, each of the entrusted decision support agents (1) to (3) votes and the conference agent 7 accepts.
[0044]
S20 determines a policy. That is, the conference agent (depth = 0) 7 determines the policy by a majority vote by counting the pros and cons of the policy voted by each decision support agent 2. For example, the pros and cons of the number of decision support agents 2 or the number of voter agents 1 entrusted by the decision support agent 2 are totaled, and a policy is determined by majority vote.
[0045]
S21 delegates execution. This notifies the policy execution agent 3 of the policy determined in S20 and delegates the execution of the policy.
[0046]
S22 evaluates the supporter. In this case, the decision support agent 2 that has contributed to the policy is evaluated based on the number of the voter agents 1 that are entrusted.
[0047]
A step S23 pays the supporter consideration. In this case, the price corresponding to the evaluation in S22 is paid to each decision support agent 2, and is used as an activity fund.
[0048]
As described above, each decision support agent's agent 2 receives the consent of the vote from each voter agent 1 and decides the policy by voting, and the contribution to the decision of the policy is determined by each decision support agent. The decision support agent 2 proposes a policy that can obtain the approval of the entrusted voter agent 1 by evaluating the number of the entrusted voters 1 for each of the authorized agents 2 and paying the corresponding consideration. The principle of competition works in proposing for or against the policy, so that a better policy is determined and implemented for the voter agent 1, and as a result, the voter agent 1 can get more benefits. .
[0049]
FIG. 4 is a flowchart illustrating the operation of the present invention. This shows an example where the depth of the conference agent is two levels (FIG. 3 shows the case of one level), where depth = 1 corresponds to a political party and depth = 0 corresponds to the entire political party (for example, parliament). ) Is equivalent to deciding a policy.
[0050]
In FIG. 4, in step S31, the decision support agent (1) proposes a policy from the voter agents (1) to (3), and requests a trust of the right (agree or disagree, here, agree).
[0051]
In S32, the decision support agent (2) proposes the opposite of the policy to the voter agents (1) to (3), and requests acceptance of the right (here, the opposite).
[0052]
In step S33, the decision support agent (3) proposes a vote for the policy to the voter agents (1) to (3), and requests a trust of the right (here, the vote).
[0053]
With the above requests from S31 to S33, the voter agents (1), (2) and (3) receive respective requests from the decision support agents (1), (2) and (3), and Learn about agent's policy proposals, policies for and against.
[0054]
In S34, the voter agent (1) notifies the decision support agent (2) of the entrustment, and the decision support agent (2) receives a right to oppose the policy of the voter agent (1).
[0055]
In S35, the voter agent (2) notifies the decision support agent (3) of the entrustment, and the decision support agent (3) receives a right to agree with the policy of the voter agent (2).
[0056]
In S36, the voter agent (3) notifies the decision support agent (1) of the entrustment, and the decision support agent (1) receives a right to agree with the policy of the voter agent (3).
[0057]
By the above S34 to S35, each decision support agent (1) to (3) was entrusted with the vote of the voter's agent (1) to (3) for the policy, and was entrusted with the vote of the policy. Become.
[0058]
From S37 to S39, each of the commissioned decision support agents (1) to (3) votes and the conference agent (depth = 1) (for example, a political party) accepts it.
[0059]
S40 determines a policy. In this method, a conference agent (depth = 1) (for example, a political party) aggregates pros and cons of a policy voted by each decision support agent agent and determines a policy by majority vote. For example, the pros and cons of the number of decision support agent agents 2 or the number of voter agents entrusted by the decision support agent agent are totaled, and a policy is determined by majority vote.
[0060]
By the above S37 to S40, a majority decision (determined by the number of decision support agents or the number of voter agents entrusted by the decision support agents) for each conference agent (depth = 1) (for example, a political party) Can make policy proposals, approve policies, and decide against policies.
[0061]
In S41, the conference agents (depth = 1) respectively vote.
In S42, the conference agent (depth = 0) determines a policy. This is the number of conference agents (depth = 1) voted in S41, the number of decision support agents belonging to the conference agent (depth = 1), or the decision making belonging to the conference agent (depth = 1). The policy is determined by a majority vote of the number of voters agents entrusted by the support agent.
[0062]
S43 delegates execution. This means that the conference agent (depth = 0) delegates the policy determined in S42 to the policy execution agent.
[0063]
S44 evaluates the supporter. This means that each conference agent (depth = 1) evaluates the contribution to the policy decision (for example, the number of decision support agents belonging to the conference agent that contributed to the policy decision, or the decision support agent received a commission. Evaluate by the number of voter agents).
[0064]
A step S45 pays the support fee. This pays the price corresponding to the evaluation in S44 to the conference agent (depth = 1).
[0065]
In S46, in each conference agent (depth = 1), the decision support agent to which it belongs evaluates the contribution to the policy decision (evaluates based on the number of voter agents entrusted by the decision support agent).
[0066]
In step S47, the value evaluated in step S46 is paid to each decision support agent.
As described above, each decision support agent receives a consent from each voter's agent for or against the policy, votes, and the conference agent (depth = 1) determines the policy by a majority decision. 1) voted, the conference agent (depth = 0) decided the policy by majority decision, outsourced the decided policy to the policy enforcer agent, and evaluated the contribution to the policy decision, and The corresponding consideration is paid to the conference agent (depth = 1), and the conference agent (depth = 1) evaluates the contribution of the decision support agent to the decision-making agent to which it belongs (by the number of entrusted voters). Evaluation) and paying for it, the decision support agent proposes a policy that can be approved by the entrusted voters, proposes a policy in favor, Rui works is competition to propose the opposite policy, are performed better policy is determined for voters agent, as a result, voters agent it is possible to get more beneficiaries.
[0067]
FIG. 5 is an explanatory diagram of the democracy of the present invention.
FIG. 5A shows an example corresponding to direct democracy. In this direct democracy, as shown in the figure, the voter agent 1 directly participates in the decision of the policy, and the conference agent (depth = 0) 7 decides the policy (the policy is decided by a majority decision of the number of the voter agents 1). And delegate execution.
[0068]
FIG. 5B shows an example corresponding to the indirect democracy. This indirect democracy corresponds to the flowchart of FIG. 3 described in the present application. As shown in the figure, the voter agent 1 makes a decision-making support agent agent 2 propose a policy, approve a policy, and disagree with a policy. The rights are entrusted, and the entrusted decision support agent 2 votes for the conference agent (depth = 0) 7, and the conference agent (depth = 0) determines a policy by a majority decision, and delegates the determined policy ( (Delegated to the policy executor agent 3). At this time, as described above, the decision support agent 2 is evaluated for the policy decision, and a fee corresponding to the evaluation is paid for the activity support of the decision support agent 2, etc. The principle of competition works to obtain a more promising policy proposal, a policy approval, or a policy opposition, allowing more beneficiaries to be returned to the voter agent 1.
[0069]
FIG. 5C shows an example corresponding to the political party indirect democracy. This political party indirect democracy corresponds to the flowchart of FIG. 4 described in the present application. As shown in the figure, a voter agent 1 makes a decision support agent agent 2 propose a policy, approve a policy, and oppose a policy. , And voted for a conference agent (depth = 1) 7 such as a political party to which the entrusted decision support agent 2 belongs, and the conference agent (depth = 1) decided the policy by majority vote, The conference agent (depth = 0) votes on the determined policy, and the conference agent (depth = 0) determines the policy by majority vote, and delegates the execution of the determined policy (to the policy enforcer agent 3). Things. At this time, as described above, the conference agent (depth 1) and the decision support agent 2 are evaluated for the policy decision, and the conference agent (depth = 1) is paid for the evaluation. And funding the activities of decision-making support agent 2, etc., the principle of competition works to obtain a policy proposal, a vote in favor of the policy, or a contradiction of the policy of voter agent 1, and more It is possible to return the benefit to the voter agent 1.
[0070]
FIG. 6 shows a hierarchical explanatory diagram of the present invention. This has a tree structure that communicates between the conference agent 7, the decision support agent agent 2, and the voter agent 3 in association with the depths 0, 1, 2, 3,. The hierarchy is shown clearly. here,
(1) Depth = 0: A conference agent (depth = 0) is arranged at a depth = 0 of the root node, and the conference agent (depth = 0) is a voter agent 1, a decision support agent agent 2, A policy agent from the conference agent (depth = 1) 7 accepts an intention to make a policy decision, decides the policy by majority decision, delegates the decided policy to a policy executor agent 3 (not shown), and executes the policy. .
[0071]
(2) Depth = 1: When depth = 1, the voter agent 1 shown in the figure notifies the conferencing agent (depth = 0) of an intention to make a decision on a policy (a decision on approval or disapproval of the decision). Agent agent 2 and a conference agent (depth = 1).
[0072]
(3) Depth = 2: A decision support agent (depth = 1), a conference agent (depth = 1), and a voter agent 1 having a depth = 1 are arranged.
[0073]
(4) Depth = 3: For depth = 3, the decision-making support agent (depth = 2) 2 or the conference agent (depth = 2) 7 having a depth of 2 agrees or disagrees with the presentation of the policy, A voter agent 1 for indicating intentions such as approval or disapproval of a policy is arranged.
[0074]
As described above, by arranging the conference agent 7, the decision support agent 2 and the voter agent 1 in a tree structure in correspondence with the depth and communicating (making a decision flow), the policy is arranged in order from the deepest hierarchy. It is possible to consolidate intentions such as approval / disapproval of the plan and approval / disapproval of the policy and finally decide by majority vote, and delegate the execution of the decided policy to the policy executor agent 3. At this time, an evaluation that has contributed to the decision of the policy is calculated, and a price corresponding to the evaluation is given to the conference agent 7 and the decision support agent 2 as an activity cost, so that the conference agent 7 and the decision support agent are provided. By using the principle of competition between the two, it becomes possible for the voter agent 1 to propose a policy to improve the profits obtained and make a pro or cons of the policy.
[0075]
(Appendix 1)
A voter agent paying tax and voting for a decision supporter, a decision supporter agent selected by voting from the voter agent and proposing and deciding a policy, and the decision supporter agent or the decision supporter for a policy In a democratic political system comprising a policy executor agent that executes a policy determined by a majority vote of said voter agents whose agents are entrusted,
A plurality of decision-support agents who receive and aggregate intentions such as policy proposals or policy approvals and dissents from the voter agent, and propose or disagree with the proposed policies; and
A policy execution agent that executes the policy determined by the majority decision of the voter agent's approval or disapproval, wherein the decision support agent agent or the decision support agent agent is entrusted;
Means for calculating, when the policy is determined or executed, an evaluation of the decision support agent for the policy, and paying a price commensurate with the evaluation;
Democratic political system characterized by having.
[0076]
(Appendix 2)
The evaluation of the policy decision is performed based on the number of the decision support agent agents who contributed to the policy decision or the number of the voter agents entrusted by the decision support agent agent. The democratic political system described in Appendix 1.
[0077]
(Appendix 3)
Providing a one-level or multi-level conference agent between the decision support agent agent and the policy executor agent;
A supplementary feature, wherein a decision indication of another conference agent to which the conference agent belongs or the decision support agent is determined by majority decision, and if there is a higher-ranking conference agent, the decision indication is notified to the decision agent and the decision is made by majority decision. Democratic political system as described in 1 or Appendix 2.
[0078]
(Appendix 4)
A voter agent paying tax and voting for a decision supporter, a decision supporter agent selected by voting from the voter agent and proposing and deciding a policy, and the decision supporter agent or the decision supporter for a policy In a democratic politics method, the agent comprises a policy executor agent executing a policy determined by a majority vote of the entrusted voter agents,
A plurality of decision-support agents who receive and aggregate intentions such as policy proposals or policy approvals and dissents from the voter agent, and propose or disagree with the proposed policies; and
A policy execution agent that executes the policy determined by a majority vote of the voter agent's approval or disapproval of the decision support agent agent or the trust support agent;
When the policy is determined or executed, an evaluation of the decision support agent's decision on the policy is calculated, and payment for the evaluation is made.
Democratic politics characterized by that.
[0079]
【The invention's effect】
As described above, according to the present invention, in the political system 4 in which the voter agent 1, the decision support agent agent 2, and the policy enforcer agent 3 participate, the decision support agent agent 2 and the conference agent 7 determine the policy proposal. -The principle of competition between the decision support agent agent 2 and the conference agent 7 for policy proposals / decisions is adopted because a structure is adopted in which more support consideration is given as the voter agent 1 reflects the intention of the voter agent 1 more. To improve the quality of policy making and increase the influence of the voter agent 1 on the decision support agent 2 and the conference agent 7.
[Brief description of the drawings]
FIG. 1 is a system configuration diagram of the present invention.
FIG. 2 is a flowchart (overall) illustrating the operation of the present invention.
FIG. 3 is a flowchart (consignment) for explaining the operation of the present invention.
FIG. 4 is an operation explanatory flowchart of the present invention.
FIG. 5 is an explanatory diagram of the democracy of the present invention.
FIG. 6 is an explanatory diagram of a hierarchy according to the present invention.
[Explanation of symbols]
1: Voter agent
2: Decision support agent
3: Policy executor agent
4: Political system
5: Decision making system
6: Supporter evaluation system
7: Conference agent

Claims (3)

A voter agent paying tax and voting for a decision supporter, a decision supporter agent selected by voting from the voter agent and proposing and deciding a policy, and the decision supporter agent or the decision supporter for a policy In a democratic political system comprising a policy executor agent that executes a policy determined by a majority vote of said voter agents whose agents are entrusted,
A plurality of decision-support agents who receive and aggregate intentions such as policy proposals or policy approvals and dissents from the voter agent, and propose or disagree with the proposed policies; and
A policy execution agent that executes the policy determined by the majority decision of the voter agent's approval or disapproval, wherein the decision support agent agent or the decision support agent agent is entrusted;
Means for calculating, when the policy is determined or executed, an evaluation of the decision support agent's decision on the policy, and paying a price commensurate with the evaluation. . The evaluation of the policy decision is performed based on the number of the decision support agent agents who contributed to the policy decision or the number of the voter agents entrusted to the decision support agent agent. The democratic political system according to claim 1, wherein Providing a one-level or multi-level conference agent between the decision support agent agent and the policy executor agent;
The decision indication of another conference agent to which the conference agent belongs or the decision support agent is determined by majority decision, and if there is a higher-ranking conference agent, the decision indication is notified to the decision agent and the decision is made by majority decision. The democratic political system according to claim 1 or 2.

Images