It is known that we can aggregate the opinions of different agents to find high-quality solutions to complex problems. However, choosing agents to form a team is still a great challenge. Moreover, it is essential to use a good aggregation methodology in order to unleash the potential of a given team in solving complex problems. In my thesis, I present two different novel models to aid in the team formation process. Moreover, I propose a new methodology for extracting rankings from existing agents. I show experimental results both in the Computer Go domain and in the building design domain.

Team formation is a critical step in deploying a multi-agent team. In some scenarios, agents coordinate by voting continuously. When forming such teams, should we focus on the diversity of the team or on the strength of each member? Can a team of diverse (and weak) agents outperform a uniform team of strong agents? We propose a new model to address these questions. Our key contributions include: (i) we show that a diverse team can overcome a uniform team and we give the necessary conditions for it to happen; (ii) we present optimal voting rules for a diverse team; (iii) we perform synthetic experiments that demonstrate that both diversity and strength contribute to the performance of a team; (iv) we show experiments that demonstrate the usefulness of our model in one of the most difficult challenges for Artificial Intelligence: Computer Go.