Performance models for large scale multiagent systems: using distributed POMDP building blocks

Given a large group of cooperative agents, selecting the right coordination or conflict resolution strategy can have a significant impact on their performance (e.g., speed of convergence). While performance models of such coordination or conflict resolution strategies could aid in selecting the right strategy for a given domain, such models remain largely uninvestigated in the multiagent literature. This paper takes a step towards applying the recently emerging distributed POMDP (partially observable Markov decision process) frameworks, such as MTDP (Markov team decision process), in service of creating such performance models. To address issues of scale-up, we use small-scale models, called building blocks that represent the local interaction among a small group of agents. We discuss several ways to combine building blocks for performance prediction of a larger-scale multiagent system.We present our approach in the context of DCSPs (distributed constraint satisfaction problems), where we first show that there is a large bank of conflict resolution strategies and no strategy dominates all others across different domains. By modeling and combining building blocks, we are able to predict the performance of five different DCSP strategies for four different domain settings, for a large-scale multiagent system. Our approach thus points the way to new tools for strategy analysis and performance modeling in multiagent systems in general.

[1]  Ronald Parr,et al.  Flexible Decomposition Algorithms for Weakly Coupled Markov Decision Problems , 1998, UAI.

[2]  Stuart J. Russell,et al.  How Long Will It Take? , 1992, AAAI.

[3]  Weixiong Zhang,et al.  Distributed breakout revisited , 2002, AAAI/IAAI.

[4]  Bart Selman,et al.  Heavy-Tailed Phenomena in Satisfiability and Constraint Satisfaction Problems , 2000, Journal of Automated Reasoning.

[5]  A. V. Lowe,et al.  The Law of the Sea. , 1985 .

[6]  Victor R. Lesser,et al.  Multi-agent policies: from centralized ones to decentralized ones , 2002, AAMAS '02.

[7]  Marius-Calin Silaghi,et al.  Asynchronous Search with Aggregations , 2000, AAAI/IAAI.

[8]  Neil Immerman,et al.  The Complexity of Decentralized Control of Markov Decision Processes , 2000, UAI.

[9]  Henry Kautz,et al.  Branch and bound algorithm selection by performance prediction , 2001, Conference on Uncertainty in Artificial Intelligence.

[10]  Nicholas R. Jennings,et al.  Learning to select a coordination mechanism , 2002, AAMAS '02.

[11]  Thomas Dean,et al.  Decomposition Techniques for Planning in Stochastic Domains , 1995, IJCAI.

[12]  Clifford Goodman,et al.  American Society of Mechanical Engineers , 1988 .

[13]  Makoto Yokoo,et al.  Distributed constraint satisfaction algorithm for complex local problems , 1998, Proceedings International Conference on Multi Agent Systems (Cat. No.98EX160).

[14]  Omer F. Rana,et al.  Performance management of mobile agent systems , 2000, AGENTS '00.

[15]  Joelle Pineau,et al.  A Hierarchical Approach to POMDP Planning and Execution , 2004 .

[16]  Milind Tambe,et al.  The Communicative Multiagent Team Decision Problem: Analyzing Teamwork Theories and Models , 2011, J. Artif. Intell. Res..

[17]  Victor R. Lesser,et al.  The Use of Meta-level Information in Learning Situation-Specific Coordination , 1997, IJCAI.

[18]  Christian Bessiere,et al.  Backtracking in Distributed Constraint Networks , 1998 .

[19]  Steven Minton,et al.  Solving Large-Scale Constraint-Satisfaction and Scheduling Problems Using a Heuristic Repair Method , 1990, AAAI.

[20]  Milind Tambe,et al.  Argumentation as distributed constraint satisfaction: applications and results , 2001, AGENTS '01.

[21]  Wei-Min Shen,et al.  A Dynamic Distributed Constraint Satisfaction Approach to Resource Allocation , 2001, CP.