Solving Multiagent Networks Using Distributed Constraint Optimization
In many cooperative multiagent domains, the effect of local interactions between agents can be compactly represented as a network structure. Given that agents are spread across such a network, agents directly interact only with a small group of neighbors. A distributed constraint optimization proble...
Gespeichert in:
Veröffentlicht in: | The AI magazine 2008-09, Vol.29 (3), p.47-62 |
---|---|
Hauptverfasser: | , , |
Format: | Artikel |
Sprache: | eng |
Schlagworte: | |
Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
container_end_page | 62 |
---|---|
container_issue | 3 |
container_start_page | 47 |
container_title | The AI magazine |
container_volume | 29 |
creator | Pearce, Jonathan P. Tambe, Milind Maheswaran, Rajiv |
description | In many cooperative multiagent domains, the effect of local interactions between agents can be compactly represented as a network structure. Given that agents are spread across such a network, agents directly interact only with a small group of neighbors. A distributed constraint optimization problem (DCOP) is a useful framework to reason about such networks of agents. Given agents' inability to communicate and collaborate in large groups in such networks, we focus on an approach called k‐optimality for solving DCOPs. In this approach, agents form groups of one or more agents until no group of k or fewer agents can possibly improve the DCOP solution; we define this type of local optimum, and any algorithm guaranteed to reach such a local optimum, as k‐optimal. The article provides an overview of three key results related to k‐optimality. The first set of results gives worst‐case guarantees on the solution quality of k‐optima in a DCOP. These guarantees can help determine an appropriate k‐optimal algorithm, or possibly an appropriate constraint graph structure, for agents to use in situations where the cost of coordination between agents must be weighed against the quality of the solution reached. The second set of results gives upper bounds on the number of k‐optima that can exist in a DCOP. These results are useful in domains where a DCOP must generate a set of solutions rather than a single solution. Finally, we sketch algorithms for k‐optimality and provide some experimental results for 1‐, 2‐ and 3‐optimal algorithms for several types of DCOPs. |
doi_str_mv | 10.1609/aimag.v29i3.2159 |
format | Article |
fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>gale_proqu</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_journals_208119162</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><galeid>A186225625</galeid><sourcerecordid>A186225625</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c6407-6f0f60552da31d9dcabe9b281b29526dab78c6a7a07cd65585f8d9962baa70953</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNqVkl1v2yAUhtHUSU273vcyWq8mzRng8HXpZW0XKWukflwjjLFH55gMcLvu14_UvWikaG2FBAKe9xwO5wXgGMEJolB8UXalmskdFjafYETEOzDCOUOZoBjtgRFkOc-mFOJ9cBDCLYSQ8pyOwOmVa-9s14x_9G20qjFdHF-YeO_8rzC-CZubbzZEb8s-mmo8c13aKJuo5Tralf2ronXdB_C-Vm0wR0_rIbg5O72efc8Wy_P5rFhkmk4hy2gNawoJwZXKUSUqrUojSsxRiQXBtFIl45oqpiDTFSWEk5pXIlVQKsWgIPkh-DjEXXv3uzchylvX-y6llBhyhASiOEEnA9So1kjb1S69WK9s0LJAnGJMKN6EynZQqX7jVes6U9t0vMVPdvBpVGZl9U7Bpy1BYqL5ExvVhyDnV5dvYC9ezfLzxf-KfGK1a1vTGJl6M1tu85-f8WWf-m9CmoJtfsYwpNjC4YBr70LwppZrn2zoHySCcuNK-ehK-ehKuXFlkohBcp--6-FFXhZFMf96BiGbsvwfNVDjHw</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>208119162</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Solving Multiagent Networks Using Distributed Constraint Optimization</title><source>EZB-FREE-00999 freely available EZB journals</source><source>Alma/SFX Local Collection</source><creator>Pearce, Jonathan P. ; Tambe, Milind ; Maheswaran, Rajiv</creator><creatorcontrib>Pearce, Jonathan P. ; Tambe, Milind ; Maheswaran, Rajiv</creatorcontrib><description>In many cooperative multiagent domains, the effect of local interactions between agents can be compactly represented as a network structure. Given that agents are spread across such a network, agents directly interact only with a small group of neighbors. A distributed constraint optimization problem (DCOP) is a useful framework to reason about such networks of agents. Given agents' inability to communicate and collaborate in large groups in such networks, we focus on an approach called k‐optimality for solving DCOPs. In this approach, agents form groups of one or more agents until no group of k or fewer agents can possibly improve the DCOP solution; we define this type of local optimum, and any algorithm guaranteed to reach such a local optimum, as k‐optimal. The article provides an overview of three key results related to k‐optimality. The first set of results gives worst‐case guarantees on the solution quality of k‐optima in a DCOP. These guarantees can help determine an appropriate k‐optimal algorithm, or possibly an appropriate constraint graph structure, for agents to use in situations where the cost of coordination between agents must be weighed against the quality of the solution reached. The second set of results gives upper bounds on the number of k‐optima that can exist in a DCOP. These results are useful in domains where a DCOP must generate a set of solutions rather than a single solution. Finally, we sketch algorithms for k‐optimality and provide some experimental results for 1‐, 2‐ and 3‐optimal algorithms for several types of DCOPs.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0738-4602</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 2371-9621</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1609/aimag.v29i3.2159</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>La Canada: John Wiley & Sons, Inc</publisher><subject>Algorithm ; Algorithms ; Artificial intelligence ; Computer networks ; Costs ; Evaluation ; Mathematics problems ; Optimization ; Sensors ; Teams</subject><ispartof>The AI magazine, 2008-09, Vol.29 (3), p.47-62</ispartof><rights>2008 The Authors. AI Magazine published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of Association for the Advancement of Artificial Intelligence</rights><rights>COPYRIGHT 2008 John Wiley & Sons, Inc.</rights><rights>Copyright Association for the Advancement of Artificial Intelligence Fall 2008</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c6407-6f0f60552da31d9dcabe9b281b29526dab78c6a7a07cd65585f8d9962baa70953</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c6407-6f0f60552da31d9dcabe9b281b29526dab78c6a7a07cd65585f8d9962baa70953</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><link.rule.ids>314,777,781,27905,27906</link.rule.ids></links><search><creatorcontrib>Pearce, Jonathan P.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Tambe, Milind</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Maheswaran, Rajiv</creatorcontrib><title>Solving Multiagent Networks Using Distributed Constraint Optimization</title><title>The AI magazine</title><addtitle>AI Magazine</addtitle><description>In many cooperative multiagent domains, the effect of local interactions between agents can be compactly represented as a network structure. Given that agents are spread across such a network, agents directly interact only with a small group of neighbors. A distributed constraint optimization problem (DCOP) is a useful framework to reason about such networks of agents. Given agents' inability to communicate and collaborate in large groups in such networks, we focus on an approach called k‐optimality for solving DCOPs. In this approach, agents form groups of one or more agents until no group of k or fewer agents can possibly improve the DCOP solution; we define this type of local optimum, and any algorithm guaranteed to reach such a local optimum, as k‐optimal. The article provides an overview of three key results related to k‐optimality. The first set of results gives worst‐case guarantees on the solution quality of k‐optima in a DCOP. These guarantees can help determine an appropriate k‐optimal algorithm, or possibly an appropriate constraint graph structure, for agents to use in situations where the cost of coordination between agents must be weighed against the quality of the solution reached. The second set of results gives upper bounds on the number of k‐optima that can exist in a DCOP. These results are useful in domains where a DCOP must generate a set of solutions rather than a single solution. Finally, we sketch algorithms for k‐optimality and provide some experimental results for 1‐, 2‐ and 3‐optimal algorithms for several types of DCOPs.</description><subject>Algorithm</subject><subject>Algorithms</subject><subject>Artificial intelligence</subject><subject>Computer networks</subject><subject>Costs</subject><subject>Evaluation</subject><subject>Mathematics problems</subject><subject>Optimization</subject><subject>Sensors</subject><subject>Teams</subject><issn>0738-4602</issn><issn>2371-9621</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2008</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>N95</sourceid><sourceid>8G5</sourceid><sourceid>ABUWG</sourceid><sourceid>AFKRA</sourceid><sourceid>AZQEC</sourceid><sourceid>BEC</sourceid><sourceid>BENPR</sourceid><sourceid>CCPQU</sourceid><sourceid>DWQXO</sourceid><sourceid>GNUQQ</sourceid><sourceid>GUQSH</sourceid><sourceid>M2O</sourceid><recordid>eNqVkl1v2yAUhtHUSU273vcyWq8mzRng8HXpZW0XKWukflwjjLFH55gMcLvu14_UvWikaG2FBAKe9xwO5wXgGMEJolB8UXalmskdFjafYETEOzDCOUOZoBjtgRFkOc-mFOJ9cBDCLYSQ8pyOwOmVa-9s14x_9G20qjFdHF-YeO_8rzC-CZubbzZEb8s-mmo8c13aKJuo5Tralf2ronXdB_C-Vm0wR0_rIbg5O72efc8Wy_P5rFhkmk4hy2gNawoJwZXKUSUqrUojSsxRiQXBtFIl45oqpiDTFSWEk5pXIlVQKsWgIPkh-DjEXXv3uzchylvX-y6llBhyhASiOEEnA9So1kjb1S69WK9s0LJAnGJMKN6EynZQqX7jVes6U9t0vMVPdvBpVGZl9U7Bpy1BYqL5ExvVhyDnV5dvYC9ezfLzxf-KfGK1a1vTGJl6M1tu85-f8WWf-m9CmoJtfsYwpNjC4YBr70LwppZrn2zoHySCcuNK-ehK-ehKuXFlkohBcp--6-FFXhZFMf96BiGbsvwfNVDjHw</recordid><startdate>20080922</startdate><enddate>20080922</enddate><creator>Pearce, Jonathan P.</creator><creator>Tambe, Milind</creator><creator>Maheswaran, Rajiv</creator><general>John Wiley & Sons, Inc</general><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>N95</scope><scope>XI7</scope><scope>8GL</scope><scope>ISN</scope><scope>ISR</scope><scope>3V.</scope><scope>4T-</scope><scope>4U-</scope><scope>7RQ</scope><scope>7WY</scope><scope>7WZ</scope><scope>7XB</scope><scope>87Z</scope><scope>88I</scope><scope>8AL</scope><scope>8FE</scope><scope>8FG</scope><scope>8FK</scope><scope>8FL</scope><scope>8G5</scope><scope>ABJCF</scope><scope>ABUWG</scope><scope>AEUYN</scope><scope>AFKRA</scope><scope>ALSLI</scope><scope>ARAPS</scope><scope>AZQEC</scope><scope>BEC</scope><scope>BENPR</scope><scope>BEZIV</scope><scope>BGLVJ</scope><scope>CCPQU</scope><scope>CNYFK</scope><scope>DWQXO</scope><scope>E3H</scope><scope>F2A</scope><scope>FRNLG</scope><scope>F~G</scope><scope>GNUQQ</scope><scope>GUQSH</scope><scope>HCIFZ</scope><scope>JQ2</scope><scope>K60</scope><scope>K6~</scope><scope>K7-</scope><scope>L.-</scope><scope>L6V</scope><scope>M0C</scope><scope>M0N</scope><scope>M1O</scope><scope>M2O</scope><scope>M2P</scope><scope>M7S</scope><scope>MBDVC</scope><scope>P5Z</scope><scope>P62</scope><scope>PQBIZ</scope><scope>PQBZA</scope><scope>PQEST</scope><scope>PQQKQ</scope><scope>PQUKI</scope><scope>PTHSS</scope><scope>Q9U</scope><scope>S0X</scope><scope>U9A</scope></search><sort><creationdate>20080922</creationdate><title>Solving Multiagent Networks Using Distributed Constraint Optimization</title><author>Pearce, Jonathan P. ; Tambe, Milind ; Maheswaran, Rajiv</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c6407-6f0f60552da31d9dcabe9b281b29526dab78c6a7a07cd65585f8d9962baa70953</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2008</creationdate><topic>Algorithm</topic><topic>Algorithms</topic><topic>Artificial intelligence</topic><topic>Computer networks</topic><topic>Costs</topic><topic>Evaluation</topic><topic>Mathematics problems</topic><topic>Optimization</topic><topic>Sensors</topic><topic>Teams</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Pearce, Jonathan P.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Tambe, Milind</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Maheswaran, Rajiv</creatorcontrib><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>Gale Business: Insights</collection><collection>Business Insights: Essentials</collection><collection>Gale In Context: High School</collection><collection>Gale In Context: Canada</collection><collection>Gale In Context: Science</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Corporate)</collection><collection>Docstoc</collection><collection>University Readers</collection><collection>Career & Technical Education Database</collection><collection>ABI/INFORM Collection</collection><collection>ABI/INFORM Global (PDF only)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>ABI/INFORM Global (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Science Database (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Computing Database (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest SciTech Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Technology Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni) (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>ABI/INFORM Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Research Library (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Materials Science & Engineering Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Sustainability</collection><collection>ProQuest Central UK/Ireland</collection><collection>Social Science Premium Collection</collection><collection>Advanced Technologies & Aerospace Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Essentials</collection><collection>eLibrary</collection><collection>ProQuest Central</collection><collection>Business Premium Collection</collection><collection>Technology Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest One Community College</collection><collection>Library & Information Science Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Korea</collection><collection>Library & Information Sciences Abstracts (LISA)</collection><collection>Library & Information Science Abstracts (LISA)</collection><collection>Business Premium Collection (Alumni)</collection><collection>ABI/INFORM Global (Corporate)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Student</collection><collection>Research Library Prep</collection><collection>SciTech Premium Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Computer Science Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Business Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Business Collection</collection><collection>Computer Science Database</collection><collection>ABI/INFORM Professional Advanced</collection><collection>ProQuest Engineering Collection</collection><collection>ABI/INFORM Global</collection><collection>Computing Database</collection><collection>Library Science Database</collection><collection>Research Library</collection><collection>Science Database</collection><collection>Engineering Database</collection><collection>Research Library (Corporate)</collection><collection>Advanced Technologies & Aerospace Database</collection><collection>ProQuest Advanced Technologies & Aerospace Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest One Business</collection><collection>ProQuest One Business (Alumni)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic Eastern Edition (DO NOT USE)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic UKI Edition</collection><collection>Engineering Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Basic</collection><collection>SIRS Editorial</collection><jtitle>The AI magazine</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Pearce, Jonathan P.</au><au>Tambe, Milind</au><au>Maheswaran, Rajiv</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Solving Multiagent Networks Using Distributed Constraint Optimization</atitle><jtitle>The AI magazine</jtitle><addtitle>AI Magazine</addtitle><date>2008-09-22</date><risdate>2008</risdate><volume>29</volume><issue>3</issue><spage>47</spage><epage>62</epage><pages>47-62</pages><issn>0738-4602</issn><eissn>2371-9621</eissn><abstract>In many cooperative multiagent domains, the effect of local interactions between agents can be compactly represented as a network structure. Given that agents are spread across such a network, agents directly interact only with a small group of neighbors. A distributed constraint optimization problem (DCOP) is a useful framework to reason about such networks of agents. Given agents' inability to communicate and collaborate in large groups in such networks, we focus on an approach called k‐optimality for solving DCOPs. In this approach, agents form groups of one or more agents until no group of k or fewer agents can possibly improve the DCOP solution; we define this type of local optimum, and any algorithm guaranteed to reach such a local optimum, as k‐optimal. The article provides an overview of three key results related to k‐optimality. The first set of results gives worst‐case guarantees on the solution quality of k‐optima in a DCOP. These guarantees can help determine an appropriate k‐optimal algorithm, or possibly an appropriate constraint graph structure, for agents to use in situations where the cost of coordination between agents must be weighed against the quality of the solution reached. The second set of results gives upper bounds on the number of k‐optima that can exist in a DCOP. These results are useful in domains where a DCOP must generate a set of solutions rather than a single solution. Finally, we sketch algorithms for k‐optimality and provide some experimental results for 1‐, 2‐ and 3‐optimal algorithms for several types of DCOPs.</abstract><cop>La Canada</cop><pub>John Wiley & Sons, Inc</pub><doi>10.1609/aimag.v29i3.2159</doi><tpages>16</tpages><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record> |
fulltext | fulltext |
identifier | ISSN: 0738-4602 |
ispartof | The AI magazine, 2008-09, Vol.29 (3), p.47-62 |
issn | 0738-4602 2371-9621 |
language | eng |
recordid | cdi_proquest_journals_208119162 |
source | EZB-FREE-00999 freely available EZB journals; Alma/SFX Local Collection |
subjects | Algorithm Algorithms Artificial intelligence Computer networks Costs Evaluation Mathematics problems Optimization Sensors Teams |
title | Solving Multiagent Networks Using Distributed Constraint Optimization |
url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-20T23%3A11%3A19IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-gale_proqu&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Solving%20Multiagent%20Networks%20Using%20Distributed%20Constraint%20Optimization&rft.jtitle=The%20AI%20magazine&rft.au=Pearce,%20Jonathan%20P.&rft.date=2008-09-22&rft.volume=29&rft.issue=3&rft.spage=47&rft.epage=62&rft.pages=47-62&rft.issn=0738-4602&rft.eissn=2371-9621&rft_id=info:doi/10.1609/aimag.v29i3.2159&rft_dat=%3Cgale_proqu%3EA186225625%3C/gale_proqu%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=208119162&rft_id=info:pmid/&rft_galeid=A186225625&rfr_iscdi=true |