Abstract
Novel systems allocating coalitions of humans and unmanned heterogeneous vehicles will act as force multipliers for future real-world missions. Conventional coalition formation architectures seek to compute efficient robot coalitions by leveraging either a single greedy, approximation, or market-based algorithm, which renders such architectures inapplicable to a variety of real-world mission scenarios. A novel, intelligent multi-criteria decision making framework is presented that reasons over a library of coalition formation algorithms for selecting the most appropriate subset of algorithm(s) to apply to a wide spectrum of complex missions. The framework is based on influence diagrams in order to handle uncertainties in dynamic real-world environments. An existing taxonomy comprised of multiple mission and domain dependent features is leveraged to classify the coalition formation algorithms. Dimensionality reduction is achieved via principal component analysis, which extracts the most significant taxonomy features crucial for decision making. A link analysis technique provides the mission specific utility values of each feature-value pair and algorithm in the library. Experimental results demonstrate that the presented framework accurately selects the most appropriate subset of coalition formation algorithm(s) based on multiple mission criteria, when applied to a number of simulated real-world mission scenarios.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Sandholm, T., Larson, K., Andersson, M., Shehory, O., & Tohmé, F. (1999). Coalition structure generation with worst case guarantees. Artificial Intelligence, 111(1–2), 209–238.
Service, T.C., Adams, J.A. (2011). Coalition formation for task allocation: Theory and algorithms. Journal of Autonomous Agents and Multi-agent Systems, 22(2), 225–248.
Abdallah, S., & Lesser, V. (2004). Organization-based cooperative coalition formation. In: Proceedings of the IEEE/WIC/ACM International Conference on Intelligent Agent Technology, pp. 162–168.
Shehory, O., & Kraus, S. (1998). Methods for task allocation via agent coalition formation. Artificial Intelligence, 101, 165–200.
Tošić, P. T., & Agha, G. A. (2005). Maximal clique based distributed coalition formation for task allocation in large-scale multi-agent systems. In: Proceedings of the Massively Multi-Agent Systems, I, 104–120.
Vig, L., & Adams, J. A. (2006b). Multi-robot coalition formation. IEEE Transactions on Robotics, 22(4), 637–649.
Dang, V. D., & Jennings, N. (2004). Generating coalition structures with finite bound from the optimal guarantees. In: Proceedings of the Third International Joint Conference on Autonomous Agents and MultiAgent Systems, pp. 564–571.
Rahwan, T., Ramchurn, S., Jennings, N., & Giovannucci, A. (2009). An anytime algorithm for optimal coalition structure generation. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research, 34, 521–567.
Rothkopf, M. H., Pekeč, A., & Harstad, R. M. (1998). Computationally manageable combinational auctions. Management Science, 44(8), 1131–1147.
Gerkey, B., & Matarić, M. J. (2002). Sold!: Auction methods for multirobot coordination. IEEE Transactions on Robotics and Automation, 18(5), 758–768.
Shiroma, P. M., & Campos, M. F. M. (2009). CoMutaR: A framework for multi-robot coordination and task allocation. In: Proceedings of the IEEE International Conference on Intelligent Robots and Systems, pp. 4817–4824.
Vig, L., & Adams, J. A. (2006a) Market-based multi-robot coalition formation. In: Proceedings of the 8th International Symposium on Distributed Autonomous Robotic Systems, pp. 227–236.
DeJong, P. (2005). Coalition formation in multi-agent UAV systems. MS Thesis, University of Central Florida.
Service, T. C., & Adams, J. A. (2010). Coalition formation algorithm taxonomy. Tech. Rep. HMT-10-03, Vanderbilt University.
Kjærulff, U. B., & Madsen, A. L. (2008). Bayesian networks and influence diagrams: A guide to construction and analysis. Information Science and Statistics. New York, NY: Springer.
Zhang, G., Jiang, J., Su, Z., Qi, M., & Fang, H. (2010). Searching for overlapping coalitions in multiple virtual organizations. Information Sciences, 180(17), 3140–3156.
Weerdt, M., Zhang, Y., & Klos, T. (2007). Distributed task allocation in social networks. In: Proceedings of the 6th International Joint Conference on Autonomous Agents and Multiagent Systems, pp. 17–24.
Gaston, M. E., & desJardins, M. (2005). Agent organized networks for dynamic team formation. In: Proceedings of the 4th International Joint Conference on Autonomous Agents and Multiagent Systems, pp. 230–237.
Sujit, P. B., George, J. M., & Beard, R. W. (2008). Multiple UAV coalition formation. In: Proceedings of the American Control Conference, pp. 2010–2015.
Campbell, A., Wu, A. S., & Shumaker, R. (2008). Multi-agent task allocation: Learning when to say no. In: Proceedings of the 10th Annual Conference on Genetic and Evolutionary Computation, pp. 201–208.
Koes, M., Nourbakhsh, I., & Sycara, K. (2005). Heterogeneous multirobot coordination with spatial and temporal constraints. In: Proceedings of the 20th National Conference on Artificial Intelligence, pp. 1292–1297.
Ramchurn, S. D., Polukarov, M., Farinelli, A., Truong, C., & Jennings, N. R. (2010). Coalition formation with spatial and temporal constraints. In: Proceedings of the 9th International Conference on Autonomous Agents and Multiagent Systems, pp. 1181–1188.
Service, T.C., Adams, J.A. (2011). Constant factor approximation algorithms for coalition structure generation. Journal of Autonomous Agents and Multi-Agent Systems, 23(1), 1–17.
Service, T. C., Sen, S. D., & Adams, J. A. (2014). A simultanesous descending auction for multirobot task allocation. In: Proceedings of the 2014 IEEE International Conference on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics.
Cao, Y. U., Fukunaga, A. S., & Kahng, A. (1997). Cooperative mobile robotics: Antecedents and directions. Autonomous Robots, 4(1), 7–27.
Dudek, G., Jenkin, M., & Milios, E. (2002). A taxonomy of multirobot systems. In T. Balch & L. E. Parker (Eds.), Robot teams: From diversity to polymorphism (pp. 3–22). Natick, MA: AK Peters Ltd.
Farinelli, A., Iocchi, L., & Nardi, D. (2004). Multirobot systems: A classification focused on coordination. IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics, Part B: Cybernetics, 34(5), 2015–2028.
Gerkey, B. P., & Matarić, M. J. (2004). A formal analysis and taxonomy of task allocation in multi-robot systems. International Journal of Robotics Research, 23(9), 939–954.
Kleinberg, J. M. (1999). Authoritative sources in a hyperlinked environment. Journal of the ACM, 46(5), 604–632.
Page, L., Sergey, S., Motwani, R., & Winograd, T. (1999). The pagerank citation ranking: Bringing order to the web. Tech. Rep. 1999–66, Stanford InfoLab, Stanford University.
Jolliffe, I. (1972). Discarding variables in a principal component analysis. I: Artificial data. Journal of the Royal Statistics Society. Series C (Applied Statistics), 21(2), 160–173.
Song, F., Guo, Z., & Mei, D. (2010). Feature selection using principal component analysis. In: Proceedings of the International Conference on System Science, Engineering Design and Manufacturing Informatization, pp. 27–30.
Dunteman, G. H. (1989). Principal components analysis, vol. 69. Newbury Park, CA: Sage Publications.
Yu, Q., & Terzopoulos, D. (2007). A decision network framework for the behavioral animation of virtual humans. In: Proceedings of the 2007 ACM SIGGRAPH/Eurographics Symposium on Computer Animation, pp. 119–128.
Sen, S. D., & Adams, J. A. (2013). A decision network based framework for multiagent coalition formation. In: Proceedings of the 12th International Conference on Autonomous Agents and Multi-agent Systems, pp. 55–62.
Cohen, M. D. (1984). Coping with complexity: The adaptive value of changing utility. The American Economic Review, 74(1), 30–42.
Cyert, R. M., DeGroot, M. H. (1979) Adaptive utility. In: Expected Utility Hypotheses and the Allais Paradox, pp. 223–241. Netherlands: Springer
Nielsen, T. D., & Jensen, F. V. (2004). Learning a decision maker’s utility function from (possibly) inconsistent behavior. Artificial Intelligence, 160(1), 53–78.
Grüne-Yanoff, T., & Hansson, S. O. (2009). Preference change: An introduction. In: Preference Change, pp. 1–26. Netherlands: Springer
Neumann, L. J., & Morgenstern, O. (1947). Theory of games and economic behavior. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
Nokia: Qt. (2012). http://www.qt.io/. Accessed 7 Jan 2012.
NORSYS: Netica application: A complete software package to solve problems using bayesian belief networks and influence diagrams. (2012). http://www.norsys.com/netica.html. Accessed 12 June 2012
Acknowledgments
This research has been supported by an ONR DEPSCOR Award # N000140911161.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Sen, S.D., Adams, J.A. An influence diagram based multi-criteria decision making framework for multirobot coalition formation. Auton Agent Multi-Agent Syst 29, 1061–1090 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10458-014-9276-y
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10458-014-9276-y