Yukun Yuan
ABSTRACT
As various smart services are increasingly deployed in modern cities, many unexpected conflicts arise due to various physical world couplings. Existing solutions for conflict resolution often rely on centralized control to enforce predetermined and fixed priorities of different services, which is challenging due to the inconsistent and private objectives of the services. Also, the centralized solutions miss opportunities to more effectively resolve conflicts according to their spatiotemporal locality of the conflicts. To address this issue, we design a decentralized negotiation and conflict resolution framework named DeResolver, which allows services to resolve conflicts by communicating and negotiating with each other to reach a Pareto-optimal agreement autonomously and efficiently. Our design features a two-level semi-supervised learning-based algorithm to predict acceptable proposals and their rankings of each opponent through the negotiation. Our design is evaluated with a smart city case study of three services: intelligent traffic light control, pedestrian service, and environmental control. In this case study, a data-driven evaluation is conducted using a large data set consisting of the GPS locations of 246 surveillance cameras and an automatic traffic monitoring system with more than 3 million records per day to extract real-world vehicle routes. The evaluation results show that our solution achieves much more balanced results, i.e., only increasing the average waiting time of vehicles, the measurement metric of intelligent traffic light control service, by 6.8% while reducing the weighted sum of air pollutant emission, measured for environment control service, by 12.1%, and the pedestrian waiting time, the measurement metric of pedestrian service, by 33.1%, compared to priority-based solution.
- N. S Altman. 1992. An introduction to kernel and nearest-neighbor nonparametric regression. The American Statistician (1992).Google Scholar
- T. Baarslag, M. JC Hendrikx, K. V Hindriks, and C. M Jonker. 2016. Learning about the opponent in automated bilateral negotiation: a comprehensive survey of opponent modeling techniques. Autonomous Agents and Multi-Agent Systems (2016).Google Scholar
- Z B. Celik, G. Tan, and P. D McDaniel. 2019. IoTGuard: Dynamic Enforcement of Security and Safety Policy in Commodity IoT. In NDSS.Google Scholar
- F. V Cespedes, A. M Ciechanover, and M. Eiran. 2018. BreezoMeter: Making Air Pollution Data Actionable. (2018).Google Scholar
- R. M. Coehoorn and N. R. Jennings. 2004. Learning on Opponent's Preferences to Make Effective Multi-Issue Negotiation Trade-Offs. In ICEC '04. ACM.Google Scholar
- U. Endriss. 2006. Monotonic Concession Protocols for Multilateral Negotiation. In AAMAS '06. ACM.Google Scholar
- J. Friedman, T. Hastie, and R. Tibshirani. 2001. The elements of statistical learning. Vol. 1. Springer series in statistics New York.Google Scholar
- K. Hindriks and D. Tykhonov. 2008. Opponent Modelling in Automated Multi-issue Negotiation Using Bayesian Learning. In AAMAS.Google Scholar
- T. K. Ho. 1995. Random decision forests. In Proceedings of 3rd international conference on document analysis and recognition. IEEE.Google Scholar
- C. Hou. 2004. Predicting agents tactics in automated negotiation. In IEEE/WIC/ACM IAT '04.Google Scholar
- Intel. 2019. Intelligent traffic management system. https://solutionsdirectory.intel.com/solutions-directory/Intelligent_Traffic_Management_SystemGoogle Scholar
- T. Ito, H. Hattori, and M. Klein. 2007. Multi-issue Negotiation Protocol for Agents: Exploring Nonlinear Utility Spaces.. In IJCAI.Google Scholar
- S. Ji, Y. Zheng, Z. Wang, and T. Li. 2019. A Deep Reinforcement Learning-Enabled Dynamic Redeployment System for Mobile Ambulances. ACM IMWUT (2019).Google Scholar
- D. G Kleinbaum, K Dietz, M Gail, M. Klein, and M. Klein. 2002. Logistic regression.Google Scholar
- G. Lai, C. Li, and K. Sycara. 2006. Efficient multi-attribute negotiation with incomplete information. Group Decision and Negotiation (2006).Google Scholar
- L. Li, Y. Lv, and F. Wang. 2016. Traffic signal timing via deep reinforcement learning. IEEE/CAA Journal of Automatica Sinica (2016).Google Scholar
- M. Li, H. Li, and Z. Zhou. 2009. Semi-supervised document retrieval. Information Processing & Management 45, 3 (2009), 341--355.Google ScholarDigital Library
- C. Mike Liang, B. F. Karlsson, N. D. Lane, F. Zhao, J. Zhang, Z. Pan, Z. Li, and Y. Yu. 2015. SIFT: Building an Internet of Safe Things. In IPSN '15. ACM.Google Scholar
- R. Lin, S. Kraus, J. Wilkenfeld, and J. Barry. 2008. Negotiating with bounded rational agents in environments with incomplete information using an automated agent. Artificial Intelligence 172, 6-7 (2008), 823--851.Google ScholarDigital Library
- R. Liu, Z. Wang, L. Garcia, and M. Srivastava. 2019. RemedioT: Remedial Actions for Internet-of-Things Conflicts. In BuildSys '19. ACM.Google Scholar
- Y. Lou and S. Wang. 2016. Approximate representation of the Pareto frontier in multiparty negotiations: Decentralized methods and privacy preservation. European Journal of Operational Research 254, 3 (2016), 968--976.Google ScholarCross Ref
- M. Ma, S. M. Preum, and J. A Stankovic. 2017. Cityguard: A watchdog for safety-aware conflict detection in smart cities. In IoTDI. ACM.Google ScholarDigital Library
- M. Ma, S M. Preum, W Tarneberg, M. Ahmed, M. Ruiters, and J. Stankovic. 2016. Detection of runtime conflicts among services in smart cities. In SMARTCOMP.Google Scholar
- M. Ma, J. A Stankovic, and L. Feng. 2018. Cityresolver: a decision support system for conflict resolution in smart cities. In ICCPS '18.Google Scholar
- S. Munir and J. A Stankovic. 2014. Depsys: Dependency aware integration of cyber-physical systems for smart homes. In ICCPS '14.Google ScholarDigital Library
- J. F Nash Jr. 1950. The bargaining problem. Econometrica: Journal of the Econometric Society (1950), 155--162.Google Scholar
- NYC. 2020. NYC Open Data. https://opendata.cityofnewyork.us/Google Scholar
- City of Newark. 2020. City of Newark Open Data. http://data.ci.newark.nj.us/Google Scholar
- Graz University of Technology. 2019. New traffic light system automatically recognizes pedestrians' intent to cross the road. Retrieved Nov 24, 2019 from https://phys.org/news/2019-05-traffic-automatically-pedestrians-intent-road.htmlGoogle Scholar
- R. K. Pasumarthi, S. Bruch, X. Wang, C. Li, M. Bendersky, Ma. Najork, J. Pfeifer, N. Golbandi, R. Anil, and S. Wolf. 2019. TF-Ranking: Scalable TensorFlow Library for Learning-to-Rank. In KDD '19. ACM.Google Scholar
- A. Piscitello, F. Paduano, A. A Nacci, M. D Noferi, D. and Santambrogio, and D. Sciuto. 2015. Danger-system: Exploring new ways to manage occupants safety in smart building. In 2015 IEEE 2nd World Forum on Internet of Things (WF-IoT).Google Scholar
- R. S Sutton and A. G Barto. [n.d.]. Reinforcement learning: An introduction.Google Scholar
- K. Sycara and D. Zeng. 1997. Benefits of learning in negotiation. In AAAI '97.Google Scholar
- M. Szummer and E. Yilmaz. 2011. Semi-supervised learning to rank with preference regularization. In CIKM '11. ACM.Google Scholar
- R. M. B. S. Thais, B. R. Linnyer, and A. F. L. Antonio. 2010. How to conciliate conflicting users' interests for different collective, ubiquitous and context-aware applications?. In IEEE Local Computer Network Conference. 288--291.Google ScholarDigital Library
- S. Wang, T. He, D. Zhang, Y. Shu, Y. Liu, Y. Gu, C. Liu, H. Lee, and S. H. Son. 2018. BRAVO: Improving the Rebalancing Operation in Bike Sharing with Rebalancing Range Prediction. ACM IMWUT (2018).Google ScholarDigital Library
- F. V. Webster. 1958. Traffic signal settings. Technical Report.Google Scholar
- H. Wei, N. Xu, H. Zhang, G. Zheng, X. Zang, C. Chen, W. Zhang, Y. Zhu, K. Xu, and Z. Li. 2019. Colight: Learning network-level cooperation for traffic signal control. In CIKM '19.Google Scholar
- H. Wei, G. Zheng, H. Yao, and Z. Li. 2018. IntelliLight: A Reinforcement Learning Approach for Intelligent Traffic Light Control. In KDD.Google Scholar
- M. Wiering. 2000. Multi-agent reinforcement learning for traffic light control. In ICML '2000. 1151--1158.Google Scholar
- H. Yang, S. Tsai, K. Liu, S. Lin, and J. Gao. 2019. Patrol Scheduling Against Adversaries with Varying Attack Durations. In AAMAS '19.Google Scholar
- Y. Yuan, D. Zhang, F. Miao, J. Chen, T. He, and S. Lin. 2019. p^ 2Charging: Proactive Partial Charging for Electric Taxi Systems. In ICDCS.Google Scholar
- D. Zhang, Y. Li, F. Zhang, M. Lu, Y. Liu, and T. He. 2013. CoRide: Carpool Service with a Win-Win Fare Model for Large-Scale Taxicab Networks. In SenSys '13.Google Scholar
Index Terms
- DeResolver: a decentralized negotiation and conflict resolution framework for smart city services
Recommendations
DeResolver: A Decentralized Conflict Resolution Framework with Autonomous Negotiation for Smart City Services
As various smart services are increasingly deployed in modern cities, many unexpected conflicts arise due to various physical world couplings. Existing solutions for conflict resolution often rely on centralized control to enforce predetermined and fixed ...
Towards a Context-Aware Knowledge Model for Smart Service Systems
Computational Collective IntelligenceAbstractThe advancement of the Internet of things, big data, and mobile computing leads to the need for smart services that enable the context awareness and the adaptability to their changing contexts. Today, designing a smart service system is a complex ...
User-centric smart services in the cloud
The smart internetIn this chapter we describe our vision for the next generation of IT services. Services will be automatically discovered, procured and integrated with the service consumer's technical environment. This whole process will be determined by the policies ...
Comments