Combinatorial Models for Multi-Agent Scheduling Problems

Scheduling models deal with the best way of carrying out a set of jobs on given processing resources. Typically, the jobs belong to a single decision maker, who wants to find the most profitable way of organizing and exploiting available resources, and a single objective function is specified. If different objectives are present, there can be multiple objective functions, but still the models refer to a centralized framework, in which a single decision maker, given data on the jobs and the system, computes the best schedule for the whole system. This approach does not apply to those situations in which the allocation process involves different subjects (agents), each having his/her own set of jobs, and there is no central authority who can solve possible conflicts in resource usage over time. In this case, the role of the model must be partially redefined, since rather than computing "optimal" solutions, the model is asked to provide useful elements for the negotiation process, which eventually leads to a stable and acceptable resource allocation. Multi-agent scheduling models are dealt with by several distinct disciplines (besides optimization, we mention game theory, artificial intelligence etc), possibly indicated by different terms. We are not going to review the whole scope in detail, but rather we will concentrate on combinatorial models, and how they can be employed for the purpose on hand. We will consider two major mechanisms for generating schedules, auctions and bargaining models, corresponding to different information exchange scenarios.

[1]  James J. Solberg,et al.  INTEGRATED SHOP FLOOR CONTROL USING AUTONOMOUS AGENTS , 1992 .

[2]  K. McConway,et al.  Decision Theory: An Introduction to the Mathematics of Rationality , 1986 .

[3]  Weiming Shen,et al.  Applications of agent-based systems in intelligent manufacturing: An updated review , 2006, Adv. Eng. Informatics.

[4]  Wayne E. Smith Various optimizers for single‐stage production , 1956 .

[5]  Peter Brucker,et al.  Scheduling Algorithms , 1995 .

[6]  Philip M. Wolfe,et al.  Multiproject Scheduling with Limited Resources: A Zero-One Programming Approach , 1969 .

[7]  S. French Decision Theory: An Introduction to the Mathematics of Rationality , 1986 .

[8]  J. Nash THE BARGAINING PROBLEM , 1950, Classics in Game Theory.

[9]  Alessandro Agnetis,et al.  Multi-agent single machine scheduling , 2007, Ann. Oper. Res..

[10]  Claudio Arbib,et al.  A competitive scheduling problem and its relevance to UMTS channel assignment , 2004, Networks.

[11]  Alessandro Agnetis,et al.  Scheduling Problems with Two Competing Agents , 2004, Oper. Res..

[12]  C. Plott,et al.  A BINARY CONFLICT ASCENDING PRICE (BICAP) MECHANISM FOR THE DECENTRALIZED ALLOCATION OF THE RIGHT TO USE RAILROAD TRACKS. , 1996 .

[13]  A. Alan B. Pritsker,et al.  Multiproject Scheduling with Limited Resources , 1968 .

[14]  Carlos Ramos,et al.  A distributed architecture and negotiation protocol for scheduling in manufacturing systems , 1999 .

[15]  M. Mariotti Nash bargaining theory when the number of alternatives can be finite , 1998 .

[16]  Alexander Grigoriev,et al.  Multiplicity and complexity issues in contemporary production scheduling , 2007 .

[17]  Michael P. Wellman,et al.  Auction Protocols for Decentralized Scheduling , 2001, Games Econ. Behav..

[18]  Daniel C. Schultz,et al.  A QoS Concept for Packet Oriented S-UMTS Services , 2002 .