在龐大且開放的分散式計算環境中，傳統的信賴模型由於缺乏完善的信賴程度更新機制，很容易出現節點間推薦優良服務的效能低落、服務熱點產生、甚至是無法有效排擠詐欺服務的問題，因而導致額外成本的付出。本論文利用社會學行動理論與人際環境關係理論，設計的一個新的信賴模型。在此信賴模型中，發展節點間的 「合作」、 「競爭」 以及 「同業公會」 等橫向關係，提升節點間信賴程度的更新效率，進而增進信賴模型的穩定性。我們設計了一個有視覺化介面的分散式計算環境動態模擬器，以測試信賴模型在面對動態環境中無法預期的計算節點 「上線」、 「離線」、 「無預警當機」 甚至 「出現詐欺服務」 時的應變能力。模擬實驗證實，我們的信賴模型在整體服務滿意度、計算成本等指標上，均有較佳的表現。

In a large open distributed computing environment, due to the lack of a good mechanism for trust update among computing nodes, traditional trust model often encounters problems such as low quality of service recommendation, occurrence of hot spots, and no effective mechanism to exclude deceptive nodes. In this thesis, we use the action theory and inter-person relation theory in social science to design a new trust model with relations between nodes such as cooperation, competition, and guild to improve the efficiency and stability of trust update. We have designed a dynamic simulator with a visual interface for distributed computing to test the abilities of the trust model under scenarios such as bringing nodes on-line, taking nodes off-line, unexpectedly service outage, and occurrence of deceptive nodes. Our experiments revealed that our trust model has superior performance in various indices such as service satisfaction and computational cost.

[1] 朱俊茂, 楊壽保, 樊建平, 陳明宇, 「Grid 與 P2P 混合計算環境下基於推薦證據推理的信任模型」, 中國科學技術大學計算機科學技術系, 中國科學計算技術研究所, 民 94.
[2] 江明修, 曾冠球, 「公共生產力評估」, http://npo.nccu.edu.tw/content/section02/item03_doc/200109.pdf , 2001.
[3] 林誠謙, 李世昌, 鄧炳坤, 「全球網格(World Wide Grid)發展趨勢」, http://www.sinica.edu.tw/as/advisory/journal/12-2/73-77.pdf, 2002.
[4] 吳齊殷, 莊庭瑞, 「超連結網絡分析:一項分析網路社會結構的新方法」, 資訊社會研究, 頁 127-148, 民 94.
[5] 吳明蔚, 「P2P：從技術到新開放價值」, http://web.ydu.edu.tw/~hjw/course/p2p/ref03.pdf, 2002.
[6] 柯瑞普斯 (M. D. Kreps) 著, 鄧方 譯, 「賽局理論與經濟模型」 (Game Theory and Economic Modeling), 台北 : 五南, 1996.
[7] 孫本文, 「建設本位文化的標準」, 中國文化建設討論集, 第58-59頁, 經緯書局, 1935.
[8] 黃振華, 張興建譯, 「社會科學方法論：馬克斯‧涂爾幹‧韋伯」, 台北 : 三貌書齋, 時報出版, 民 81.
[9] 惠美譯, 季登斯 (Giddens，Anthony) 著, 「資本主義與現代社會理論：馬克斯‧涂爾幹‧韋伯」,台北：遠流, 民78.
[10]W. Alderson, “Marketing Behavior and Executive Action,” 1957.
[11]E. Babbie, The Practice of Social Research, C.A. : Wadsworth Publishing Company, 1995.
[12]E. M. Berman, Productivity in Public and Nonprofit Organizations : Strategies and Techniques, C.A. : Sage, 1998.
[13]R. Buyya, Economic-based Distributed Resource Management and Scheduling for Grid Computing, http://arxiv.org/pdf/cs.DC/0204048, Monash University, Melbourne, Australia, April 2002.
[14]L. Charles, P. Jo, S. LeBlanc, ”D-S Theory”, http://www.oz.nthu.edu.tw/~d929802/anthropology/archaeology/ar-01.htm, in Archeological Explanation. 2nd ed. New York: Columbia University Press, 1984.
[15]L. Dodds, FOAF-a-Matic, http://www.ldodds.com/foaf/foaf-a-matic.zh-tw.html, Creative Commons License, 2003.
[16]G. E. Caiden, Administrative Reform Comes of Age, N.Y. : Walterde Gruyter, 1991.
[17]L. Eschenauer, V. D. Gligor, “A Key-Management Scheme for Distributed Sensor Networks,” in Proceedings of the 9th ACM conference on Computer and. communications security , NY, USA, 2002.
[18]J. Ferber, Multi-Agent System: An Introduction to Distributed Artificial Intelligence, Addison Wesley Longman, 1999.
[19]G. Fox, S. Pallickara, The Narada Event Brokering System: Overview and Extensions, Community Grid Labs, Indiana University, 2003.
[20]G. Fox, S. Pallickara, “NaradaBrokering: A Distributed Middleware Framework and Architecture for Enabling Durable Peer-to-Peer Grids,” Proceedings of the In-ternational Middleware Conference, 2003.
[21]J. Golbeck, Cai-Nicolas Ziegler, “Investigating Correlations of Trust and Interest Similarity - Do Birds of a Feather Really Flock Together? ” Decision Support Systems, 2005.
[22]J. Golbeck, “Semantic Web Interaction through Trust Network Recommender Systems,” Proceedings of the End User Semantic Web Interaction Workshop at the 4th International Semantic Web Conference, 2005.
[23]J. Golbeck, J. Hendler, “Inferring Trust Relationships in Web-based Social Networks,” ACM Transactions on Internet Technology, 2002.
[24]J. Golbeck, J. Hendler, B. Parsia, “Trust Networks on the Semantic Web,” Proceedings of Cooperative Intelligent Agents, Helsinki, Finland, 2003.
[25]C. Haythornthwaite, “A Social network theory of tie strength and media use: A framework for evaluating multi-level impacts of new media,” http://alexia.lis.uiuc.edu/~haythorn/sna_theory.html, 1999.
[26]C. Kadushin, “A Short Introduction to Social Network: A Non-Technical Elementary Primer,” http://construct.haifa.ac.il/~cerpe/papers/kadushin.html, Cerpe Workshop, 2000.
[27]M. S. Kamvar, “EigenRep: Reputation Management in P2P Networks”, Technical Report, SCCM-02-16, Stanford University, 2002.
[28]T. Klosy, H. L. Poutr, ”Using Reputation-based Trust for Assessing Agent Reliability,” CWI, Kruislaan 413, NL-1098 SJ Amsterdam, 2004.
[29]E. R. Merkle, R. A. Richardson, “Digital dating and virtual relating: Conceptualizing computer mediated relationships,” Family Relations, 49(2), 187-192, 2000.
[30]K. Miller, Communication theories: perspectives, processes, and contexts, pp. 153-193, Boston: McGraw-Hill, 2002.
[31]G. Shafer, A Mathematical Theory of Evidence,. Princeton University Press, NJ, 1976.
[32]V. Smirnova, Multi-Agent System for Distributed Data Fusion in Peer-to-Peer Environment, University of Jyväskylä, Department of Mathematical Information Technology, 2002.
[33]D. J. Watts, “Six Degrees: The Science of a Connected Age,” W W Norton & Co Inc., 2004.