Continual coordination through shared activities

Interacting agents that interleave planning and execution must reach consensus on their commitments to each other. In domains where agents have varying degrees of interaction and different constraints on communication and computation, agents will require different coordination protocols in order to efficiently reach consensus in real time. We briefly describe a largely unexplored class of real-time, distributed planning problems (inspired by interacting spacecraft missions), new challenges they pose, and a general approach to solving the problems. These problems involve self-interested agents that have infrequent communication but collaborate on joint activities. We describe a Shared Activity Coordination (SHAC) framework that provides a decentralized algorithm for negotiating the scheduling of shared activities over the lifetimes of multiple agents, a soft, real-time approach to reaching consensus during execution with limited communication, and a foundation for customizing protocols for negotiating planner interactions. We apply SHAC to a realistic simulation of interacting Mars missions and illustrate the simplicity of protocol development.

[1]  Milind Tambe,et al.  Toward Team-Oriented Programming , 1999, ATAL.

[2]  Milind Tambe,et al.  Towards Flexible Teamwork , 1997, J. Artif. Intell. Res..

[3]  Victor Lesser,et al.  Environment Centered Analysis and Design of Coordination Mechanisms , 1996 .

[4]  Daniel D. Corkill,et al.  Hierarchical Planning in a Distributed Environment , 1979, IJCAI.

[5]  Makoto Yokoo,et al.  The Distributed Constraint Satisfaction Problem: Formalization and Algorithms , 1998, IEEE Trans. Knowl. Data Eng..

[6]  Edmund H. Durfee,et al.  Performance of Coordinating Concurrent Hierarchical Planning Agents Using Summary Information , 2000, ATAL.

[7]  Sarit Kraus,et al.  Reaching Agreements Through Argumentation: A Logical Model and Implementation , 1998, Artif. Intell..

[8]  Michael P. Georgeff,et al.  Communication and interaction in multi-agent planning , 1983, AAAI 1983.

[9]  Milind Tambe,et al.  The Benefits of Arguing in a Team , 1999, AI Mag..

[10]  Eithan Ephrati,et al.  Divide and Conquer in Multi-Agent Planning , 1994, AAAI.

[11]  Rob Sherwood,et al.  Using Iterative Repair to Improve the Responsiveness of Planning and Scheduling , 2000, AIPS.

[12]  Sape Mullender,et al.  Distributed systems , 1989 .

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

[14]  Marie desJardins,et al.  Coordinating a Distributed Planning System , 1999, AI Mag..

[15]  Amy L. Lansky,et al.  Localized Search for Controlling Automated Reasoning , 1990 .