Scaling Up Agent Coordination Strategies

Deploying intelligent agents to do peoples' bidding in environments ranging from Internet marketplaces to Mars has received much attention. Exactly what an agent is and in what sense a computational agent can behave intelligently remain the subject of considerable debate. However, most would agree that coordination, an agent's fundamental capability to decide on its own actions in the context of the activities of other agents around it, is a central concern of intelligent agency. The value of an intelligent agent coordination strategy lies in how well it scales along various dimensions of stress. Understanding the agent population, its task environment, and expectations about its collective behavior are central to mapping the space of potential approaches. The paper discusses agent coordination and dimensions of coordination stress.

[1]  H. Van Dyke Parunak,et al.  "Go to the ant": Engineering principles from natural multi-agent systems , 1997, Ann. Oper. Res..

[2]  Craig Boutilier Multiagent Systems: Challenges and Opportunities for Decision-Theoretic Planning , 1999, AI Mag..

[3]  Tad Hogg,et al.  Multiagent control of self-reconfigurable robots , 2000, Proceedings Fourth International Conference on MultiAgent Systems.

[4]  Manuela M. Veloso,et al.  Task Decomposition, Dynamic Role Assignment, and Low-Bandwidth Communication for Real-Time Strategic Teamwork , 1999, Artif. Intell..

[5]  Randall W. Hill,et al.  Representing and Using Organizational Knowledge in Distributed AI Systems , 1989, Distributed Artificial Intelligence.

[6]  NICHOLAS R. JENNINGS,et al.  An agent-based approach for building complex software systems , 2001, CACM.

[7]  Michael J. Prietula,et al.  Simulating organizations: computational models of institutions and groups , 1998 .

[8]  S. Rosenschein,et al.  On social laws for artificial agent societies: off-line design , 1996 .

[9]  Jeffrey M. Bradshaw,et al.  Mobile-Agent versus Client/Server Performance: Scalability in an Information-Retrieval Task , 2001, Mobile Agents.

[10]  Yoav Shoham,et al.  Taming the Computational Complexity of Combinatorial Auctions: Optimal and Approximate Approaches , 1999, IJCAI.

[11]  Edmund H. Durfee,et al.  Distributed Continual Planning for Unmanned Ground Vehicle Teams , 1999, AI Mag..

[12]  Hector J. Levesque,et al.  The adaptive agent architecture: achieving fault-tolerance using persistent broker teams , 2000, Proceedings Fourth International Conference on MultiAgent Systems.

[13]  Mark Klein,et al.  An experimental evaluation of domain-independent fault handling services in open multi-agent systems , 2000, Proceedings Fourth International Conference on MultiAgent Systems.

[14]  Jacques Ferber,et al.  Multi-agent systems - an introduction to distributed artificial intelligence , 1999 .

[15]  Eithan Ephrati,et al.  A Tractable Heuristic that Maximizes Global Utility through Local Plan Combination , 1995, ICMAS.

[16]  Nicholas R. Jennings,et al.  Commitments and conventions: The foundation of coordination in multi-agent systems , 1993, The Knowledge Engineering Review.

[17]  Edmund H. Durfee,et al.  Top-down search for coordinating the hierarchical plans of multiple agents , 1999, AGENTS '99.

[18]  Sarit Kraus,et al.  Collaborative Plans for Complex Group Action , 1996, Artif. Intell..

[19]  Gerhard Weiss,et al.  Multiagent systems: a modern approach to distributed artificial intelligence , 1999 .

[20]  James A. Hendler,et al.  The Semantic Web" in Scientific American , 2001 .

[21]  Jörg P. Müller,et al.  AGenDA—a general testbed for distributed artificial intelligence applications , 1996 .

[22]  Les Gasser,et al.  Representing and using organizational knowledge in DAI systems , 1989 .

[23]  Katia P. Sycara,et al.  Middle-Agents for the Internet , 1997, IJCAI.