A better-response strategy for self-interested planning agents

When self-interested agents plan individually, interactions that prevent them from executing their actions as planned may arise. In these coordination problems, game-theoretic planning can be used to enhance the agents’ strategic behavior considering the interactions as part of the agents’ utility. In this work, we define a general-sum game in which interactions such as conflicts and congestions are reflected in the agents’ utility. We propose a better-response planning strategy that guarantees convergence to an equilibrium joint plan by imposing a tax to agents involved in conflicts. We apply our approach to a real-world problem in which agents are Electric Autonomous Vehicles (EAVs). The EAVs intend to find a joint plan that ensures their individual goals are achievable in a transportation scenario where congestion and conflicting situations may arise. Although the task is computationally hard, as we theoretically prove, the experimental results show that our approach outperforms similar approaches in both performance and solution quality.

[1]  L. Shapley,et al.  REGULAR ARTICLEPotential Games , 1996 .

[2]  Tim Roughgarden,et al.  Algorithmic Game Theory , 2007 .

[3]  Archie C. Chapman,et al.  Automated Planning in Repeated Adversarial Games , 2010, UAI.

[4]  Eva Onaindia,et al.  Global Heuristics for Distributed Cooperative Multi-Agent Planning , 2015, ICAPS.

[5]  Malik Ghallab,et al.  Chapter 14 – Temporal Planning , 2004 .

[6]  Tom Bylander,et al.  The Computational Complexity of Propositional STRIPS Planning , 1994, Artif. Intell..

[7]  Sarit Kraus,et al.  Group planning with time constraints , 2013, Annals of Mathematics and Artificial Intelligence.

[8]  Eva Onaindia,et al.  A flexible coupling approach to multi-agent planning under incomplete information , 2015, Knowledge and Information Systems.

[9]  Silvia Richter,et al.  The LAMA Planner: Guiding Cost-Based Anytime Planning with Landmarks , 2010, J. Artif. Intell. Res..

[10]  Ronen I. Brafman,et al.  Planning Games , 2009, IJCAI.

[11]  Craig A. Knoblock,et al.  PDDL-the planning domain definition language , 1998 .

[12]  Claudio Mezzetti,et al.  Learning in Games by Random Sampling , 2001, J. Econ. Theory.

[13]  J. Neumann,et al.  Theory of games and economic behavior , 1945, 100 Years of Math Milestones.

[14]  Sarit Kraus,et al.  Solving coalitional resource games , 2010, Artif. Intell..

[15]  Christos H. Papadimitriou,et al.  On the Complexity of the Parity Argument and Other Inefficient Proofs of Existence , 1994, J. Comput. Syst. Sci..

[16]  Malte Helmert,et al.  Complexity results for standard benchmark domains in planning , 2003, Artif. Intell..

[17]  Mihalis Yannakakis,et al.  How easy is local search? , 1985, 26th Annual Symposium on Foundations of Computer Science (sfcs 1985).

[18]  Christos H. Papadimitriou,et al.  The complexity of pure Nash equilibria , 2004, STOC '04.

[19]  Yoav Shoham,et al.  Multiagent Systems - Algorithmic, Game-Theoretic, and Logical Foundations , 2009 .

[20]  L. Shapley,et al.  Potential Games , 1994 .

[21]  Pascal Bercher,et al.  A Planning Graph Heuristic for Forward-Chaining Adversarial Planning , 2008, ECAI.

[22]  N. R. Jennings,et al.  To appear in: Int Journal of Group Decision and Negotiation GDN2000 Keynote Paper Automated Negotiation: Prospects, Methods and Challenges , 2022 .

[23]  Paolo Traverso,et al.  Automated Planning: Theory & Practice , 2004 .

[24]  Vahab S. Mirrokni,et al.  Sink equilibria and convergence , 2005, 46th Annual IEEE Symposium on Foundations of Computer Science (FOCS'05).

[25]  Sarit Kraus,et al.  Incentive Engineering for Boolean Games , 2011, IJCAI.

[26]  Christer Bäckström,et al.  A Multi-Parameter Complexity Analysis of Cost-Optimal and Net-Benefit Planning , 2016, ICAPS.

[27]  Michael Rovatsos,et al.  Scaling Up Multiagent Planning: A Best-Response Approach , 2011, ICAPS.

[28]  Eva Onaindia,et al.  FMAP: Distributed cooperative multi-agent planning , 2014, Applied Intelligence.

[29]  Yishay Mansour,et al.  How long to equilibrium? The communication complexity of uncoupled equilibrium procedures , 2010, Games Econ. Behav..

[30]  Xiaotie Deng,et al.  Settling the Complexity of Two-Player Nash Equilibrium , 2006, 2006 47th Annual IEEE Symposium on Foundations of Computer Science (FOCS'06).

[31]  Noam Nisan,et al.  Computationally feasible VCG mechanisms , 2000, EC '00.

[32]  Malte Helmert,et al.  The Fast Downward Planning System , 2006, J. Artif. Intell. Res..

[33]  R. Rosenthal A class of games possessing pure-strategy Nash equilibria , 1973 .

[34]  Cees Witteveen,et al.  A Resource Logic for Multi-Agent Plan Merging , 2004, Annals of Mathematics and Artificial Intelligence.

[35]  Eva Onaindia,et al.  Game-Theoretic Approach for Non-Cooperative Planning , 2015, AAAI.

[36]  I. Milchtaich,et al.  Congestion Games with Player-Specific Payoff Functions , 1996 .

[37]  Steve Chien,et al.  Convergence to approximate Nash equilibria in congestion games , 2007, SODA '07.