Abstract
Coordination is a key functionality and maybe the most challenging research issue in multiagent systems, and mechanisms for achieving coordinated behavior have been well-studied. One important observation has been that different mechanisms have correspondingly different performance characteristics, and that these can change dramatically in different environments (i.e., no one mechanism is best for all domains). A more recent observation is that one can describe possible mechanisms in a domain-independent way, as simple or complex responses to certain dependency relationships between the activities of different agents. Thus agent programmers can separate encoding agent domain actions from the solution to particular coordination problems that may arise. This paper explores the specification of a large range of coordination mechanisms for the common hard “enablement” (or “happens-before”) relationship between tasks at different agents. Essentially, a coordination mechanism can be described as a set of protocols possibly unique to the mechanism, and as an associated automatic re-writing of the specification of the domain-dependent task (expressed as an augmented HTN). This paper also presents a concrete implementation of this idea in the DECAF. A novel GPGP coordination component, between the planner and the scheduler, is developed in the DECAF agent architecture. An initial exploration of the separation of domain action from meta-level coordination actions for four simple coordination mechanisms is explained then.1,2
Preview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Castelfranchi, C., Conte, R.: Distributed Artificial Intelligence and Social Science: Critical Issues. In Foundations of Distributed Artificial Intelligence, Chapter 20, 1996.
Chen, W., Decker, K.: Coordination Mechanisms for Dependency Relationships among Multiple Agents. Proceedings of the 1st International Joint Conference on Autonomous Agents and Mult-Agent Systems, Bologna, Italy, July, 2002.
Crowston, K., Osborn, C.: Modeling coordination from field experiments. Conference on Organizational Computing, Coordination and Collabor ation: Theories and Technologies for Computer-Supported Work, Austin, TX, 1989.
Davis, R., Smith, R.: Negotiation as a Metaphor for Distributed Problem Solving. Artificial Intelligence, 20:1 pp 63–109, 1983.
Decker, K., Lesser, V.: Designing a Family of Coordination Algorithms. In Proceedings of the First International Conference on Multi-Agent Systems(ICMAS-95), San Francisco, June 1995.
Decker, K., Li, J.: Coordinating Mutually Exclusive Resources using GPGP. Autonomous Agents and Multi-Agent Systems, Volume 3, 2000.
Dellarocas, C., Klein, M.: An Experimental Evaluation of Domain-Independent Fault Handling Services in Open Multi-Agent Systems. In Proceedings of ICMAS’00, Boston, MA, USA, 2000.
Durfee, E., Lesser, V.: Partial Global Planning: A Coordination Framework for Distributed Hypothesis Formation. IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man and Cybernetics, 21(5), 1167–1183, September/October 1991.
Graham, J., Decker, K.: Towards a Distributed, Environment-Centered Agent Framework. In Intelligent Agents IV, Agent Theories, Architectures, and Languages, Springer-Verlag, 2000.
Graham, J.: Real-time Scheduling in Multi-agent Systems. University of Delaware, 2001.
Hogg, T., Huberman, B.: Controlling chaos in distributed systems. IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics, 21(6):1325–1332, 1991.
Jennings, N.; Commitments and conventions: The foundation of coordination in multi-agent systems. The Knowledge Engineering Review, 8(3):223–250, 1993.
Decker, K., Sycara, K.: Intelligent Adaptive Information Agents. In Journal of Intelligent Information System, 9, 239–260, 1997.
Rustogi, S., Singh, M.: Be Patient and Tolerate Imprecision: How Autonomous Agents can Coordinate Effectively. In Proceedings of IJCAI’99, Stockholm, Sweden, August, 1999.
Sen, S., Roychoudhury, S., Arora, N.: Effect of local information on group behavior. In Proceedings of the International Conference on MAS, page 315–321, 1996.
So, Y., Durfee, E.: Designing Organizations for Computational Agent. In M.J. Pritula, K.M. Carley, and L. Gasser, editors, Simulating Organizations, page 47–64. AAAI press, 1998.
Tambe, M.: Teamwork in real-world, dynamic environments. In International conference on multi-agent systems (ICMAS96).
Wagner, T., Garvey, A., Lesser, V.: Complex Goal Criteria and its Application in Design-To-Criteria Scheduling. In Proceedings of the Fourteenth National Conference on Artificial Intelligence.
Weiss, G.: Multiagent Systems, A Modern Approach to Distributed Artificial Intelligence. P88–P92, MIT Press, 1999.
Willmott, S., Faltings, B.: The Benefits of Environment Adaptive Organizations for Agent Coordination and Network Routing Problems. In Proceedings of IJCAI⊃9, Stockholm, Sweden, August, 1999.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2002 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg
About this paper
Cite this paper
Chen, W., Decker, K. (2002). Developing Alternative Mechanisms for Multiagent Coordination. In: Kuwabara, K., Lee, J. (eds) Intelligent Agents and Multi-Agent Systems. PRIMA 2002. Lecture Notes in Computer Science(), vol 2413. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/3-540-45680-5_5
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/3-540-45680-5_5
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg
Print ISBN: 978-3-540-44026-0
Online ISBN: 978-3-540-45680-3
eBook Packages: Springer Book Archive