EVALUATION OF A COOPERATIVE AIR TRAFFIC MANAGEMENT MODEL USING PRINCIPLED NEGOTIATION BETWEEN INTELLIGENT AGENTS

Air Traffic Management decisions affect the interests of a diverse group of organizations and individuals. Agents, including individual aircraft, airlines, and ground control centers, look for conflictfree options that meet their own interests without depreciating other agents' operations. A cooperative structure for interactions of agents has been defined on the basis of Principled Negotiation. This method allows distributed decision-making for all users while providing a fair coordination through Air Traffic Management systems. The major interest of Principled Negotiation relies in its mutual gain approach to selection of options. Agents negotiate options with a traffic coordinator that ensures coordination of all users preferred operations while satisfying safety criteria. Thus, the model is flexible in responding to the needs and goals of agents, and it maintains safety. It provides users with different interests the freedom to optimize their operations, it includes Air Traffic Flow Management processes, and it certifies safe aircraft separations. A computer simulation dedicated to evaluating the benefits of such a cooperative structure is under development. The simulation provides trajectorybased traffic modeling with freedom of routing, communication, and negotiation modeling. It incorporates intelligent behavior modeling and incorporates airborne collision avoidance systems. First results show that Principled Negotiation is appropriate for coordination in a multi-agent/multi-interest system such as the Aircraft/Airspace System.

[1]  Steven M. Green,et al.  Development and evaluation of a profile negotiation process for integrating aircraft and air traffic control automation , 1993 .

[2]  Robert F. Stengel,et al.  Distributed optimization and principled negotiation for advanced air traffic management , 1996, Proceedings of the 1996 IEEE International Symposium on Intelligent Control.

[3]  Bill Sweetman ENTER ATN, AS IN INTERNET / , 1994 .

[4]  Robert A. Vivona,et al.  OVERVIEW OF A GROUNDnBASED SYSTEM CONCEPT FOR SUPPORTING INCREASED USER PREFERENCE , 1997 .

[5]  Robert F. Stengel,et al.  Optimization and coordination of multi-agent systems using principled negotiation , 1996 .

[6]  Robert F. Stengel,et al.  Principled negotiation between intelligent agents: a model for air traffic management , 1998, Artif. Intell. Eng..

[7]  Simon Kasif,et al.  A System for Induction of Oblique Decision Trees , 1994, J. Artif. Intell. Res..

[8]  Hyacinth S. Nwana,et al.  Software agents: an overview , 1996, The Knowledge Engineering Review.

[9]  Yiyuan Zhao,et al.  Free flight concept , 1997 .

[10]  Jeffrey S. Rosenschein,et al.  A game theoretic approach to distributed artificial intelligence and the pursuit problem (abstract) , 1992, SIGO.

[11]  H. Erzberger,et al.  Constrained optimum trajectories with specified range , 1980 .

[12]  Randall Davis,et al.  Negotiation as a Metaphor for Distributed Problem Solving , 1988, Artif. Intell..

[13]  George Hunter,et al.  TERMINAL AREA GUIDANCE INCORPORATING HEAVY WEATHER , 1997 .

[14]  R. Fisher,et al.  Getting to Yes: Negotiating Agreement Without Giving in , 1981 .

[15]  Heinz Erzberger,et al.  CHALLENGES OF AIR TRAFFIC MANAGEMENT RESEARCH: ANALYSIS, SIMULATION, AND FIELD TEST , 1997 .

[16]  Steven M. Green,et al.  Enabling User Preferences Through Data Exchange , 1997 .

[17]  Heinz Erzberger,et al.  FIXED-RANGE OPTIMUM TRAJECTORIES FOR SHORT-HAUL AIRCRAFT , 1976 .